Given the return of public debate on this issue Two vacancies supreme courtfrom Lógica we maintain the presence of at least one of the two together It must be covered by an expert in tax matters: tributary.
First, the most important argument is the country’s agenda: If the president and 18 governors agree in the May Charter that 50% of the 10 points are fiscal (fiscal balance, public participation and spending, tax reforms and pensions), then it makes sense for at least one of the five members (20%) to be an expert on these issues.
Secondly, importance Judiciary In the future to get out of the Argentine financial tragedy. According to various sources, we had the world’s highest taxes and inflation records, both of which reflect a lack of control over public spending. The 2024 Nobel Prize in Economics was awarded for demonstrating that the failure of states depends more on the poor performance of institutions, the judiciary among the main institutions, than on the bad economic plans of politicians. We add that this is even more so in a country where judicial defense against high taxes is necessary. Argentina is in dire need of investments, which have been feared in the past two decades for financial reasons, among other major reasons. There is a need for legal certainty and impartial, predictable rulings, especially from the court.
Third, the court’s primary responsibility for the financial tragedy. The Court was the court that best (or at least weakest) applied constitutional principles in defending taxpayers. But far from the cruelty required by the state with the highest taxes. In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. But he’s still one-eyed. Example: The court did not apply the first tax lesson, which is the distinction between tax (without compensation) and its rate (with compensation calculated on the cost of services provided). When he was able to define them in “Esso c/Mun. de Quilmes” (2021), he emphasized that prices could be calculated based on the seller’s total income. It thus encouraged other mayors to tolerate the same excesses, increasing the lack of control over their public spending. Lanús applies a 6% rate to supermarkets due to “Esso”. There are many similar examples.
Fourth, the consequences. This fundamental guilt of the judges had extremely harmful effects on the business sector, causing a lack of competitiveness and generating 45% of informal activity, i.e. almost one sale with an invoice for every sale without it. An unviable and unjust state. Behind this role lies the “judicial financial illusion.” Judges believe they are deciding between the state and corporations. But since they are taxes on production, they are decided between the state and consumers. Various studies indicate that these taxes are borne by the final consumer, at a rate of more than 40% and even more than 50% of the final price. Those who suffer most are the 18 million living below the poverty line, who buy a product from the state (with taxes) every time it costs them to buy one for themselves.
Fifth, influence from above. It is not enough to rely on tax secretaries or the opinions of the Attorney General, even if they are better. It is necessary that those who preside over these rulings include ministers who guide the way within the court and lower courts. the “Judges only talk about their rulings“Today Ministers are announcing in the media and attending various forums. A clear signal of real and positive financial change in the judiciary must be sent to the entire community and abroad.
Sixth: precedents. Since 1983, none of the 24 ministers has been an expert in tax matters, while we have had any in family law, estates, consumer defence, etc. Things did not go well for us. Neither the court nor the country. Among the requirements for its integration (222/12/2004), the most important of which is specialization. I have already said, it should be included in the country’s agenda, most of which is financial. The specialty most closely related to financial issues is taxation. Both members must be a guarantor of integrity, reputation and correct application of constitutional principles, which appear in judgments, opinions and/or doctrine. Those who were functional or responsible for the financial tragedy should not be candidates. It is not a matter of worsening the problem.
Seventh, the issue of opportunities. Many tax cases will come to court, those initiated by tax abuses in recent years and new rules of the current change process. There are no other branches with so many relevant and innovative issues.
Finally, the issue of gender. He criticizes that since 2021 there are no women on the court, while there were two women 10 years ago. Appointments must be made on the basis of merit and not on specific quotas. But the fact that there is no minimum level of diversity seems discriminatory.
conclusion: The cost to the country of a court that did not adequately limit the financial tragedy was enormous. For the reasons mentioned, at least one vacant position must be filled with an expert in tax matters, which is the most natural tax expert. Both vacancies must be filled by those who have demonstrated the correct application of constitutional principles.