Dispute over Nord Stream 2: Schwesig, the foundation and a tax file

A tax file that went up in smoke and a prime minister who says she knew nothing about it: the argument over the foundation that was supposed to make Nord Stream 2 possible never ends. Schwesig justifies himself in the Report from Berlin.

Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania’s Prime Minister Manuela Schwesig sticks to it: In the back and forth about the foundation, which should enable the completion of Nord Stream 2, she knew nothing of the essential processes. The SPD politician emphasized this in Report from Berlin. The foundation was set up in early 2021 with the aim of completing the controversial Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline despite the threat of US sanctions.

“I think that’s correct”

Specifically, the question now is when exactly did Schwesig learn that a tax file from the foundation had been destroyed by a tax officer – and whether the officer was even encouraged by politicians to do so. But Schwesig says: Last week in the evening she discovered an article online in “Cicero” and then “called her state finance minister and party friend Heiko Geue and said: ‘What is that? I ask that this be clarified’,” said Schwesig.

Neither Geue nor Justice Minister Jacqueline Bernhardt from the left informed them about the process. “I also think that’s correct,” stressed Schwesig. “A prime minister shouldn’t get involved in tax and public prosecutor matters, and that’s none of her business either.”

“No influence” on official

Against the background of the tax secrecy that Geue has maintained, Schwesig does not consider the dismissal of her finance minister to be necessary. “I can’t just interfere in tax proceedings, and he can’t just inform either.” In the meantime, the board of directors of the Nord Stream 2 Foundation had completely released Geue from tax secrecy, so that he could testify in a press conference and in the legal and financial committee.

The process itself – i.e. the burning of the tax documents by the Ribnitz-Damgarten tax office officer – was an “individual misconduct” that was “not in order”. But “the public prosecutor’s office determined that there was no political influence,” stressed Schwesig. “That’s why all the allegations that have been going on here for days – that the tax officer acted like this because of political pressure – are not correct.”

What did Schwesig discuss with the Nord Stream 2 boss?

Another point of contention: In a tax assessment, the foundation was asked to pay gift tax for an amount in the millions that it received from the Russian state-owned company Gazprom. The chairman of the foundation, Schwesig’s predecessor Erwin Sellering, claims that Schwesig had agreed with the head of Nord Stream 2, Matthias Warnig, that no gift tax would be due.

Schwesig contradicted this representation Report from Berlin. She only discussed with Warnig that the money that the foundation received should be used for climate protection. “And that is not out of the question. That has always been said – for example in the state parliament and afterwards in the public statements,” said Schwesig. Background: Funds that are used for charitable purposes such as climate protection are exempt from gift tax.