The Paris Administrative Court of Appeal has confirmed Claude Guéant’s tax adjustment in the case of the sale of two Flemish paintings, also linked to the investigation into possible Libyan financing of Nicolas Sarkozy’s campaign in 2007.
According to a judgment of July 13 of the Court Claude Guéant was the subject of a tax audit in 2011 upon his appointment to the Ministry of the Interior.
An indictment in 2015
Claude Guéant said at the time that the sum came from the sale of two paintings by Andries Van Artvelt to a Malaysian business lawyer, Siva Rajendram, and was intended to buy an apartment. In 2013, an investigation was opened into suspicions of Libyan financing of Nicolas Sarkozy’s 2007 presidential campaign. The former minister was indicted in March 2015. Justice then looked into the transfer and sent his information to the tax authorities. Investigators believe the money came from Libyan funds.
The tax administration decides in 2016 on an adjustment and imposes the sum in the category of non-commercial profits with penalties for fraudulent maneuvers, affirming that it was perceived “in return for a service of which it has clouded the circuit remuneration in order to hide its true nature”, according to the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
Nearly 540,000 euros
According to the magazine Capital, the tax adjustment was 535,000 euros. Main justifications: the experts estimate that the paintings are worth in 2013 around 40,000 euros to 50,000 euros, the documents concerning the sale are doubtful and the buyer of the paintings had received a transfer of 500,000 euros a few days before the sale.
On July 2, 2019, the Paris administrative court canceled the tax adjustment and relieved Claude Guéant of the additional tax contribution as well as penalties, ordering the State to pay 1,500 euros to Claude Guéant. The defense had argued that the statute of limitations had passed and disputed the paintings’ value estimates. The Court of Appeal agreed with the Minister and restored contributions and penalties for Guéant. The latter may contest this decision before the Council of State.