PP senator José Antonio Monago has registered a series of questions in the Senate to find out if the Treasury has initiated verification actions against David Sánchez, brother of the Prime Minister, after his officials testified before the judge.
The Popular Party has intensified scrutiny on the Treasury regarding the tax situation of David Sánchez Pérez-Castejón, brother of the Prime Minister. Senator José Antonio Monago registered a series of questions in the Senate on Wednesday to ascertain whether the agency has initiated any verification, investigation, or inspection actions against him following the declaration of its officials before Judge Beatriz Biedma.
Monago, senator for Badajoz, has focused on the different treatment that, in his opinion, the Prime Minister's brother is receiving compared to other cases. Specifically, the PP recalls that the Treasury has already informed the judge of the National Court overseeing the Plus Ultra case about the initiation of inspection actions concerning former president José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, his family, and certain related companies.
The shadow of the fiscal 'chainsaw'
"It is necessary to ask about the different criteria followed in other cases affecting individuals close to the Prime Minister," Monago stated in the registered document. The Extremaduran senator emphasizes that, according to publicly available information, the report sent by the Treasury to the Court of Instruction number 3 of Badajoz regarding David Sánchez was prepared "without any verification or inspection actions being carried out," merely contrasting the information available in its databases.
The PP considers the issue to be "particularly relevant" because, while in Zapatero's case general inspection actions would have been activated even with an ongoing criminal procedure, in the case of the Prime Minister's brother it has been maintained that "there was no significant tax risk and that it was not appropriate to initiate verification actions once the matter was judicialized."
"Can a public official who acknowledges in court that they did not fulfil their inspection obligation be understood as committing a crime of prevarication?" Monago questions.
Specific questions about the inspection
The questions registered by the PP are specific and detailed. Monago asks whether, following the declaration of the Treasury officials before Judge Biedma, any verification, investigation, or inspection actions have been initiated regarding David Sánchez. If so, he demands to know the start date, the body that agreed to them, the fiscal years they cover, and their scope (general or partial).
Additionally, the senator inquires whether actions have been taken regarding his tax residence, his income tax or non-resident income tax, possible increases in wealth, donations received, acquisitions of real estate, or income received from Spanish public entities. If not, he requests details on why actions have not been initiated, despite the "doubts raised in court regarding his tax residence, his employment relationship with a Spanish public administration, and his wealth evolution."
Monago also wants to know who ordered, supervised, or validated the report sent to the court, why it was sent "without individual signature or identifying letterhead of the Treasury," and whether any internal information has been opened to clarify the circumstances of its preparation and subsequent ratification.
Favouritism or technical criteria?
The PP does not stop there. Monago asks whether the Government can guarantee that the Treasury applies the same technical criteria, tax risk assessments, and verification processes to all taxpayers, "regardless of their personal or family relationship with government members." He also asks whether the Executive rules out that David Sánchez has received "singular, preferential, or more favourable" treatment from the agency.
Finally, the senator asks whether the Government will send to the Cortes Generales, within the legal limits of tax confidentiality, a reasoned explanation of the criteria applied by the Treasury in this case. The Executive's response, which will have to be provided in writing in the Senate, will be closely monitored by both the opposition and public opinion.
For readers interested in tax management and administrative transparency, this exchange of questions highlights the political tension surrounding equal treatment before the Treasury. The case of David Sánchez, which has accumulated months of media and judicial controversy, has become a thermometer of how the Treasury acts (or does not) when the taxpayer has illustrious surnames. The next move, presumably, will be the Government's response, which must clarify whether the inspection has been initiated or whether, on the contrary, administrative silence remains the norm.
You may also like
