Munich: Former showman boss complains to the administrative court – Munich

Edmund Radlinger fights for his good reputation. The former chairman of the Munich showmen’s association is suing the state capital because he is to be prohibited from pursuing a trade.

The long-standing chairman of the Munich Showmen’s Association, Edmund Radlinger, is currently fighting for his good reputation on several fronts in court. Just four weeks ago, the Munich District Court sentenced him to a suspended sentence of two years and a fine for tax evasion. However, the 70-year-old does not want to let that sit on him. “I don’t want to retire as a criminal or tax evader,” said the former showman boss on Tuesday in a trial before the Munich Administrative Court.

In the process, Radlinger is suing against a decision by the state capital that prohibits him from practicing his trade. The authority justified the measure, among other things, with the fact that the 70-year-old was not involved in the settlement of his tax debts. Radlinger is currently only the managing director of a GmbH.

His lawyer used the hearing before the administrative court to massively criticize the actions of the state capital. With the commercial ban, the authority immediately “unpacked the bazooka,” was one of his allegations. His client had already paid 130,000 euros before the decision was issued on January 22 last year and later another 20,000 euros. The list of debts in the decision was “definitely not up to date”.

In addition, the lawyer criticized the “scope” of the trade ban as very far-reaching. Radlinger is not only prohibited from exercising each individual trade, but also from the right to represent, for example, in a limited liability company. This requires a justification in the notification that “carries everything,” complained the 70-year-old’s lawyer.

The state capital is assuming tax arrears of 1,059,822 euros. Radlinger emphasized that he was in talks with the tax office about a comparison. His tax liability is lower than he is accused of. He was willing to pay what he still had to pay. But he could only do that if he was still allowed to practice his trade to a certain extent. A decision by the administrative court is still pending.

source site