The Provincial Court of Madrid has once again acquitted the former footballer and current coach of the Real Sociedad de San Sebastián affiliate team Xabi Alonso in the case in which he was accused of defrauding the Treasury of almost two million euros during the years 2010, 2011 and 2012.
This is agreed in a sentence issued in execution of the decision adopted last January by the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid (TSJM), that annulled the first acquittal resolution of the Hearing and ordered it to issue another with a new legal motivation, after being partially upheld some resources from the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the State Attorney’s Office.
Along with Alonso, the lawyer Iván Zaldúa and Ignasi Maestre, administrator at the time of the events of Kardzali, a company based in Madeira (Portugal) and subject to a more beneficial tax regime, to which the former soccer player transferred his rights to image in 2009 when while at Liverpool he received the offer to sign for Real Madrid.
The Prosecutor’s Office considered that it was a simulated operation to evade taxes for what it requested in the trial two and a half years in prison for each accused.
The TSJM asked the Hearing to give a reasoned response to a question that is presented as “one of the grounds of the accusation.”
Specifically, if the returns obtained by Kardzali in the exploitation of the image rights of Xabi Alonso generated outside of his employment relationship with Real Madrid and not taxed in 2010, 2011 and 2012 are under the protection of article 92 of the Law of the Personal Income Tax, which would cover the absence of taxation.
Now the Court maintains that once the simulation has been ruled out in the transfer of image rights verified by the former player to Portuguese society, no crime can be imputed to him or to the rest of the accused.
It adds that this “regardless of whether the returns obtained by Kardzali in the exploitation of the image rights of Xabi Alonso, generated outside of his employment relationship with Real Madrid, may or may not be subsumed” in the aforementioned article.
Remember that it was the accusing parties themselves – the State Prosecutor’s Office and the State Attorney – who decided to link the existence of the crime against the Public Treasury to the existence of simulation in the transfer of such rights.
The Court found that “if the transfer of the player’s rights to Kardzali was real and this entity made an active intervention in its exploitation, the accusing claims decline.”
It also emphasizes that “it is not about opaque, hidden, falsified or excluded income by the taxpayer from the knowledge of the Tax Agency.