The Taxpayer Defense Bill of the Community of Madrid is moving forward in the regional Assembly after PP and Vox have rejected the total amendments registered by Más Madrid and PSOE against the norm previously approved by the Governing Council.
To justify the text, the Minister of Economy, Finance, and Employment, Rocío Albert, has emphasized that the law is based on a basic idea: the taxpayer is not "a habitual suspect or guilty by default" but a person who, in addition to working, "complies and pays," as she has pointed out in the regional Chamber.
"And when they address the tax administration, they have the right to be attended to and to have everything explained clearly and, of course, also to be respected when the administration makes a mistake. It might seem like an obvious situation, but it is not. It is not written anywhere, and what we come to do with this law is to give legal status to that need," she claimed.
In the same vein, she stressed that those who pay their taxes are fulfilling an obligation, but that the administration is "to serve them, not to distrust them," and that the future law is designed both for those "who have to face files," as well as for a young couple buying a home and needing to complete the Transfer Tax or for the businessman who intends to leave his house to his son and "wants all tax matters to be done correctly."
The Community of Madrid has promoted this Taxpayer Defense Law with the aim of reinforcing legal security in the relationship between citizens and the tax administration, facilitating compliance with their tax obligations, and reducing the complexity of the associated procedures.
The norm will apply only to the taxes ceded by the State whose management corresponds to the Community of Madrid. Among them are the Tax on Property Transfers and Documented Legal Acts (ITP and AJD), the Inheritance and Donations Tax, the Wealth Tax, and the Gaming Taxes.
The text aims to incorporate the principle of good administration as the axis of action of the regional tax administration, with the objective of ensuring real protection of the rights of taxpayers. To this end, it designs a model of assistance based on confidentiality, the free provision of services, and attention tailored to the circumstances and needs of each person.
In this framework, special relevance is given to the principles of universal accessibility, with concrete measures aimed at eliminating barriers for elderly people and for Madrid residents with disabilities.
THE LEFT ACCUSES THAT IT DOES NOT CREATE MORE "RIGHTS"
During the parliamentary debate, the Vox deputy Ana Cuartero defended her group's willingness to "contribute to the proposal" of the regional Executive, which is why they rejected the total amendments. In her speech, she criticized PSOE and Más Madrid, arguing that it was "too much to ask" for the left not to oppose a "law for the defense of taxpayers," when, in her opinion, they are "much more about suffocating the taxpayer."
"To pursue the taxpayer, whether small, medium, or large. Sánchez has raised taxes and fees more than 100 times since he came to power," Cuartero criticized, before reviewing various areas that, according to her, have been affected by the fiscal decisions of the central Executive.
On behalf of PSOE, Daniel Rubio assured that "any improvement for the taxpayers of Madrid" will have "the hand" extended by the socialists, but he rejected that this project goes in that direction, considering that it leaves out numerous aspects.
"A true Taxpayer Defense Law should serve to expand rights, improve attention, strengthen information, and protect the taxpayer against the administration. And that is where this law falls short," Rubio stated, urging the PP to negotiate partial amendments to introduce "expansions of rights."
For his part, the deputy of Más Madrid Gumersindo Ruiz Rosales argued that, under a "friendly title," the initiative hides "a deeply flawed text that confuses the defense of citizenship with the promotion of a neoliberal agenda that dismantles the common good."
"When a law does not provide new rights, does not provide more resources, and does not provide independence, but does provide a new name, a new office, and a new communication campaign, what we have is not a reform. We have legislative marketing," he concluded.