by The partner of the president of the Community of Madrid, Isabel Díaz Ayuso, the businessman Alberto González Amador, will appear for the first time this Monday before Judge María Inmaculada Iglesias to offer all the explanations he considers appropriate to defend himself against the complaint that the prosecution filed against him for tax fraud and falsification of commercial documents, and that the opening of another procedure in which the public ministry itself is investigated and that can reach the state attorney general, Alvaro Garcia Ortiz.
All of this is due to the note that the Madrid Provincial Prosecutor’s Office sent to the media to report on the main points of the conversations held between Carlos Neira, González Amador’s lawyer, and the prosecutor who wrote the complaint, Julián Salto, before the publication of partial and incomplete information by some media. The couple of the Madrid president and the Madrid Bar Association filed complaints against the prosecutor and his superior, Pilar Rodríguez, against whom Díaz Ayuso pointed out on social networks since the businessman’s problems with the justice system became known, when remembering who was general director during the socialist government. Days later García Ortiz assumed ultimate responsibility for the communication, so she may have to respond.
The procedure followed in the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid runs parallel to the one in which the tax complaint against González Amador begins this Monday and has sometimes seemed to overshadow it. The accusation against the businessman is based on Tax agency, that last February 22 referred to the Provincial Prosecutor’s Office of Madrid the report in which it had detected tax fraud for an amount that could constitute a crime (exceeding 120,000 euros) by the entity Maxwell Cremona Engineering and Processes Society for the Promotion of the Environment. Prosecutor Salto wrote the corresponding complaint on February 13. He appeared in the Madrid courts of Plaza de Castilla on March 5.
The complaint, which corresponded to Court of Instruction number 19 of Madrid, attributes two tax crimes to González Amador for having allegedly defrauded the Treasury through Corporate Tax 155,000 euros in 2020 and 195,951 euros in 2021, “consciously and voluntarily.” He also charges him with a crime of falsifying a commercial document, because he considers that “in his fraudulent conduct” declared fictitious expenses for services never provided For which the companies also reported would have made false invoices for different amounts between 10,000 and up to 922,585 euros.
fake invoices
The complaint considers that in the 2020 financial year, Maxwell Cremona deducted a bill of 620,000 euros from the Mexican company Mke Manufacturing that is not responsible for any service provided. In 2021, repeated the deduction with an invoice of 922,585 euros from the Costa Rican Gayani; four bills each of 12,800, of Purple Star; one of 20,000 from Baluarte Desarrollo Special Employment Center; another of 21,200 from Manantial; five (three of 10,000, one of 16,000 and one of 20,000) from Bianconera Professional Services; one of 10,500 of Bianconera Spa, and one of 11,495by Ginmosur.
That year, Maxwell Cremona billed some of its services to its main client, Quirón Salud, through Masterman & Whitaker, of which Alberto González is also the sole partner and administrator. According to the tax complaint, “said company lacks the material means to provide these services,” which is why Maxwell Cremona was used. Hence, I consider that the objective of these practices is “a tax saving by transferring part of the activity to a company linked to itwith the purpose of generate negative tax bases in Masterman to compensate in the future with the benefits that it could obtain”.
The TSJ is looking for the maximum person responsible
The beginning of the statements in the criminal case against the businessman, which have produced a political storm with few precedents, coincides with the first proceedings against the prosecutors who are pursuing him. Last Thursday, the magistrate of the Madrid Superior Court Francisco José Goyena notified the order in which he initiated the first proceedings against the prosecutors.
Among the agreed measures, the magistrate demands to know “who were the specific natural persons who intervened in the decision to make public said press release and the highest person in charge (in rank) of the prosecutor’s career who agreed or approved the decision.” to disseminate the statement with the content finally sent”. This points directly to the attorney general, Álvaro García Ortiz, who, in be formally investigated, it would be by the Supreme Court, given its status as certified.
For this reason, an initially ordinary matter such as a case of fraud against a citizen – the majority of which concludes in an agreement, beneficial for all parties – can end up leading to an issue of serious impact for the Government of Pedro Sánchez, which He is the one who appointed García Ortiz as attorney general despite being the first in the history of our democracy who did not obtain the approval of suitability from the General Council of the Judiciary.
The figure of García Ortiz is, in any case, surrounded by other controversies. This same week the Association of Prosecutors, the majority in the race, and which has asked for his resignation on several occasions, responded forcefully to the demonstrations in which he stated that he finds “identical objectives” between some associations of judges and prosecutors and certain political parties. . For this reason, he has announced that he is leaving the table where he was working on a Statutory reform regarding the project to give criminal instructions to prosecutors, an issue that the Government has among its objectives to promote.
It rained on wet: Just a few days before, in addition to admitting the complaint filed by Díaz Ayuso’s boyfriend, it was known that the Supreme Court had annulled its decision to appoint her predecessor in office, Dolores Delgado, as head of the Democratic Memory Chamber Prosecutor’s Office . To top it all off, it was disapproved by the conservative majority in the Senate.
