The former director of the Tax Agency, Soledad Fernández, described it as a 'regrettable error' that the Tax Agency failed to detect for four years that Julio Martínez, a friend of former president Zapatero, did not file a tax return despite receiving a salary.
The appearance of the former director of the Tax Agency, Soledad Fernández, in the Senate has uncovered a new tax scandal. The head of the tax office from 2022 until her recent resignation admitted that it is 'incomprehensible' that the agency did not detect that Julio Martínez, a friend of former president José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, had not filed a tax return for four consecutive years.
According to Fernández herself, the case came to light following questions from PP senator Salvador de Foronda, who presented data showing that Martínez received a salary from the company ASP Renta, with the corresponding IRPF withholdings (model 190) and deductions in the Corporate Tax. Despite this, the taxpayer did not settle his personal IRPF.
A failure that 'is not understood'
During her speech, Soledad Fernández admitted that the case overwhelms her: 'I don't understand it either, I don't comprehend it', she stated, describing the situation as a 'regrettable error'. What has caught the senators' attention the most is that, in addition to the salary, Martínez was paying rent with empty bank accounts, and the property owner did declare those income in model 180.
Internal sources from the AEAT consulted indicate that it is 'impossible, implausible, that this did not come to light'. They assert that the Tax Agency's alert system is designed to automatically detect such anomalies. The suspicion circulating in the Senate hallways is that 'they have ordered to remove his data' from the system, a hypothesis that the Government categorically denies.
Traceability, key to clarifying responsibilities
What seems clear is that the AEAT has a system of tracking and traceability of all movements made in taxpayers' files. Therefore, it would be technically possible to identify the official or officials who managed Julio Martínez's case during those four years. The question senators are asking is: why has that responsibility not yet been clarified?
Senator De Foronda himself emphasized that 'it is logical for the Government or the AEAT itself to seek the person responsible' for the file. If they do not, he added, 'is it because they are not interested in it being known?'. The absence of an internal investigation to date fuels suspicions that the case may have been deliberately silenced.
For the average taxpayer, this case highlights that the Tax Agency's alert system is not infallible, or that it can be manipulated in certain cases. The feeling that there are two standards in the Tax Agency —one for anonymous citizens and another for friends of power— is spreading among public opinion.
The next likely step is for the Senate to request the appearance of the current director of the AEAT, as well as the Minister of Finance, to explain whether an internal investigation will be opened and what measures will be taken to prevent a 'regrettable error' like this from happening again. Meanwhile, the case of Julio Martínez remains a black hole in the management of the tax office.
You may also like
