The Constitutional Court is preparing to approve the tax on large fortunes, according to the report that will be discussed next week in the ordinary session of the court. This will be the first ruling issued on this matter, and it will involve the rejection of the appeal filed by the Community of Madrid, by decision of its president, Isabel Díaz Ayuso. The challenge was based on an alleged violation of the competences of the autonomous communities in the field of taxes and the possible violation of fundamental rights of the recipients of the tax, as it was understood that the principle of legal security that should protect all citizens was being broken for them, without discrimination. The rapporteur of the ruling, judge María Luisa Balaguer, considers that none of these two circumstances apply. However, for the Madrid government, these alleged violations are occurring by two means, as the tax was conceived as a complement to the wealth tax, which is not applied in the Community of Madrid. Madrid believes that this not only harms those affected by the new tax, but also goes against the tax policy designed by the autonomous administration.
The Government, on the other hand, conceived the new tax precisely to introduce some homogenization in these autonomous tax policies, given the differences between communities regarding the treatment of higher incomes and wealth. From the perspective of the proponents of the law, the discrimination between taxpayers occurs due to this regulatory dispersion, derived from the use that each community has made of its competencies and the treatment given in each case to the wealth tax. The ruling emphasizes in this sense that legislation in tax matters should always remain in the hands of the central administration. At the same time, the National Court has ruled out suspending the tax on large fortunes, rejecting the request made in this regard by the Madrid Association of Family Businesses (AMEF). The Administrative Litigation Chamber of the National Court considers that such a measure would nullify the application of the law, a decision for which it deems itself incompetent.
The temporary solidarity tax on large fortunes is temporary, approved for the years 2023 and 2024, and applies to net assets over three million euros, accrued on December 31 of each year. This tax has generated 623 million euros in 2023 from 12,010 large estates, equivalent to 0.1% of total taxpayers. These taxpayers have paid an average fee of 52,000 euros, according to data from the Ministry of Finance. Moving on to the case of former MP Alberto Rodríguez, the loss of his seat violated his fundamental rights, as it was disproportionate to the offense for which he was convicted, consisting of kicking a police officer during a demonstration. This is stated in the draft ruling that will be examined next week by the Constitutional Court, to which Rodríguez appealed for protection after being sentenced by the Supreme Court to a 1 month and 15 days prison term, later replaced by a fine. This conviction led to the loss of his seat as a deputy, a decision that was also appealed but will now remain unresolved as the Constitutional Court will reject this second request from the former MP.
The ruling, of which judge María Luisa Segoviano, from the progressive sector of the court, has been the rapporteur, provides protection to Alberto Rodríguez, but through a declaratory ruling, as another legislature has already begun and he will not recover his seat. This resolution could have been issued earlier but was delayed due to various circumstances, including the lack of renewal of the court at the end of last year, and then the successive electoral calls. There was a long debate about whether to resolve the appeal against the sentence imposed by the Supreme Court or the challenge of the decision of the former president of the Congress to revoke the seat of the aforementioned parliamentarian first. It was decided to address the Supreme Court decision first, but ensuring not to nullify the sentence issued in its entirety. The proposal in the report is to grant protection to Rodríguez, considering that the Supreme Court should have taken into account that the imposed sentence carried an excessive disqualification that affected the political participation right of the former MP. Additionally, the draft ruling dismisses the violation of the presumption of innocence of Rodríguez, as the Supreme Court made a reasonable assessment of the evidence regarding his aggression towards a law enforcement officer.
