Publication: El principio de proporcionalidad en el ámbito sancionador tributario
Loading...
Files
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2017-06-12
Authors
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
El principio de proporcionalidad informa la totalidad del ordenamiento jurídico, pero en el ámbito del Derecho tributario sancionador, al igual que los demás principios que informan esta rama del derecho, cumple una doble función, de un lado, limita la potestad sancionadora de la Hacienda pública, de otra parte, se convierte en un auténtico derecho subjetivo del presunto infractor. La proporcionalidad se aplica en la restricción de los derechos fundamentales que entran en juego, tanto en el procedimiento inspector como en el procedimiento sancionador, pues la prueba de este último se obtiene en el procedimiento inspector, pero además, en lo atinente al régimen sancionador tributario, el principio de proporcionalidad viene a establecer una justa equivalencia entre el ilícito cometido y la infracción tipificada, así como entre la infracción cometida y la sanción impuesta. La culpabilidad está íntimamente relacionada con el principio de proporcionalidad, pues es de pura lógica que a mayor culpa, mayor sanción, de tal forma que las infracciones muy graves las podemos identificar con el dolo del presunto infractor, las graves con la negligencia grave y las leves con la simple negligencia. La graduación de las sanciones tributarias se produce tanto en la calificación de la infracción como en la graduación de la propia sanción, si bien se sanciona todo incumplimiento de la norma tributaria, aplicando cálculos aritméticos para determinar la culpabilidad del obligado tributario, lo que vulnera dicho principio y, por ende, el de proporcionalidad. El acuerdo o la conformidad del interesado, al igual que sucede en las Haciendas forales, no se considera un criterio de graduación, sino un componente de la reducción de la respectiva sanción, junto con el pago y la no impugnación. El error de salto y la calificación unitaria de la infracción vulneran el principio de proporcionalidad.
The proportionality principle informs the entire legal system, but in the field of tax law sanctions, like the other principles underlying this body of law, has a double function, on the one hand limits the sanctioning power of the Treasury on the other hand, it becomes a real subjective right of the alleged infringer. The proportionality applies in restriction of fundamental rights at play in both the procedure and the inspector disciplinary proceedings, as proof of the latter is obtained in the inspection process, but also as it pertains to the tax penalty system, the principle of proportionality is to establish a fair equivalence between the crime committed and the offense established, as well as between the offense and the sanction imposed. Guilt is closely related to the principle of proportionality, it is pure logic that the more guilt, more punishment, so that the very serious infractions can identify with the intent of the alleged offender, serious with gross negligence and with slight negligence. Graduation tax penalties occurs both in the classification of the offense and the graduation of the penalty itself, although any infringement of the tax law is punishable by applying arithmetic to determine the guilt of the taxpayer, which infringes said principle and therefore, the proportionality. The agreement or acquiescence of the interested, as is the case in the Provincial Treasury, is not considered a criterion for graduation, but a component of reducing the respective sanction, with payment and uncontested. The error jump and unit classification of the offense against the principle of proportionality.
The proportionality principle informs the entire legal system, but in the field of tax law sanctions, like the other principles underlying this body of law, has a double function, on the one hand limits the sanctioning power of the Treasury on the other hand, it becomes a real subjective right of the alleged infringer. The proportionality applies in restriction of fundamental rights at play in both the procedure and the inspector disciplinary proceedings, as proof of the latter is obtained in the inspection process, but also as it pertains to the tax penalty system, the principle of proportionality is to establish a fair equivalence between the crime committed and the offense established, as well as between the offense and the sanction imposed. Guilt is closely related to the principle of proportionality, it is pure logic that the more guilt, more punishment, so that the very serious infractions can identify with the intent of the alleged offender, serious with gross negligence and with slight negligence. Graduation tax penalties occurs both in the classification of the offense and the graduation of the penalty itself, although any infringement of the tax law is punishable by applying arithmetic to determine the guilt of the taxpayer, which infringes said principle and therefore, the proportionality. The agreement or acquiescence of the interested, as is the case in the Provincial Treasury, is not considered a criterion for graduation, but a component of reducing the respective sanction, with payment and uncontested. The error jump and unit classification of the offense against the principle of proportionality.
Description
Tesis inédita de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Derecho, Departamento de Derecho Financiero y Tributario, leída el 02-02-2016