Associated information

A decide has left a trial step for the singer Shakira (44 years) when appreciating “adequate proof” that defrauded 14.5 million euros to the Treasury pretending to not reside in Spain and hiding their earnings by a company community based mostly in tax havens, between 2012 and 2014.

In a automobile, to which Efe has had entry, the pinnacle of the Court docket of Instruction quantity 2 of Barcelona considers that, although the theses of the Treasury and the protection are “diametrically opposed” by way of the tax interpretation to be utilized, there are “adequate proof of criminality” to proceed with the proceedings towards her and that the case be settled at trial.

The prison course of derives from a grievance from the Prosecutor’s Workplace, which accuses six crimes towards the Public Treasury to the Colombian artist, who has already paid the 14.5 million that the Tax Company demanded – plus one other three million in curiosity – for a alleged tax fraud dedicated between 2012 and 2014.

Shakira, during a concert in New York in 2018.

Shakira, throughout a live performance in New York in 2018.


The decide particulars within the order that, from the proceedings carried out thus far, it seems that the singer would have stopped paying taxes in Spain throughout these three years “regardless of having the duty to take action as a result of they’ve their tax residence right here.”

In that sense, he factors out that Shakira had the standing of “taxpayer” earlier than the Spanish Treasury as a result of he resided in Spain for greater than the 183 days established by regulation -243 in 2012, 212 in 2013 and 244 in 2014- and the time he was in a foreign country constituted “sporadic absences”.

The order additionally leaves Shakira’s tax advisor on trial for allegedly collaborating within the company community “erected to evade the fee of tax obligations”, each for private earnings tax and on fairness. In keeping with the decide, the defendants employed a sequence of retailers “making these those that seem as holders of the earnings and belongings” of the Colombian singer, who “would solely seem within the final time period and in corporations based mostly in territories thought of as paradise fiscal”.

Shakira, during an event in Las Vegas in 2014.

Shakira, throughout an occasion in Las Vegas in 2014.


The Justice of the Peace recollects that this it isn’t the procedural second to “resolve guilt or innocence” of the defendants, however to “confirm if the accusation introduced by the Public Prosecutor’s Workplace and the accusations filed – Tax Company and Generalitat – current adequate grounds.”

The order particulars that the paperwork that accompany the grievance of the Prosecutor’s Workplace and the skilled of the Tax Company represent “adequate proof of criminality”, as soon as they’ve been confronted with “the statements taken from the investigated and with the skilled report offered by the protection “. “This teacher has been capable of confirm that the positions of the Tax Company and the defenses, despite the fact that each are effectively based, are diametrically opposed,” provides the order, by which the decide highlights that “the examine of tax laws has been huge, particularly with regard to the idea of routine residence “.

In reality, the specialists appointed by Shakira’s protection keep that the singer had a certificates of everlasting residence within the Bahamas and that, till 2015, its presence in Spain didn’t exceed the 183 days per 12 months that required it to pay taxes on this nation. As well as, they keep that the times when he remained outdoors of Spain – on the event of his live performance excursions or his participation within the tv program The Voice in america – they shouldn’t be counted as time of residence within the nation.

Shakira and Piqué in the Davis Cup 2019.

Shakira and Piqué within the Davis Cup 2019.


The decide acknowledges that “in any respect” he can “disregard the criterion maintained by the protection that the interpretation made by the Tax Company is unacceptable, since he understands that its sole goal can be to make an individual a tax resident that so far it has by no means been. it could not be justified to dismiss the prison case as a result of there’s a affordable interpretation of the tributary norm “, provides the trainer, that for that motive refers to accusations and protection to the oral trial.

On this sense, do not forget that “the seat of prosecution can also be the place the protection should in his case show his innocence definitively, not a lot with investigative proceedings as with genuine proof that helps his thesis “.

[Más información: Shakira intenta desmontar el fraude fiscal y asegura que antes de 2015 solo visitaba puntualmente Barcelona]



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here