BGH judgment on Cum-Ex: An important signal for everyone


comment

Status: 07/28/2021 7:54 p.m.

Have taxes reimbursed that were not withheld? It’s good that the BGH has made it clear that this is of course prohibited. The verdict is an important signal – also for investigators and the judiciary.

A comment by Frank Bräutigam, ARD legal editor

The Cum-Ex business model is really complicated. It takes a while to understand. The judgment of the Federal Court of Justice, however, is clear and precise. You understand immediately. This model was a criminal offense. Period – or rather: exclamation mark!

Getting taxes back that the state did not withhold – of course that must be forbidden. It’s good that the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) has clarified that. And wipes the arguments about the supposedly “legal design models” or a “legal loophole” off the table.

It’s about everyone’s money

It is just as important that the local judiciary systematically collected the income and, according to the BGH, was expressly allowed to do so. It would be even better if such crimes were worthwhile. After all, it is about the money of all taxpayers.

The defendants today aren’t even the big fish at Cum-Ex. The verdict is still an important signal.

The opinion of Frank Bräutigam, SWR, on the BGH ruling on cum-ex deals

daily topics, 7/28/2021

Tailwind for investigators and the judiciary

For example, for the investigators and the local courts. Dozens of criminal proceedings with up to 1000 suspects, hopefully also against the big fish, can now really pick up speed with the tailwind from Karlsruhe. And at the same time ensure that lost tax money flows back to the tax authorities.

For such a mammoth complex, the judiciary has to be well-staffed. The public prosecutor’s office in Cologne, for example, has recently been better equipped for Cum-Ex. Nevertheless, this topic remains a permanent construction site. Because if the judiciary fails to do its job, the statute of limitations threatens.

The judgment is also a signal to everyone who continues to believe: If you only invent the most complicated models possible, you will somehow trick the state. That can go well. Must but not as we see today. The judiciary was late for Cum-Ex, but is now very persistent. It has to stay that way.

Editorial note

Comments generally reflect the opinion of the respective author and not that of the editors.



Source link