The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the Tax Management Body of the Barcelona Provincial Council, overturning a decision by the Contentious Administrative Court number 13. The ruling emphasizes that when the Treasury seizes an account balance, it is the responsibility of the citizen to prove that the funds cannot be confiscated.
The decision overturns a ruling that assumed that funds deposited in a woman’s bank account came solely from a non-seizable pension. However, the woman received only a monthly non-contributory disability pension of 402 euros. In 2019, she was ordered to pay 350 euros due to violations related to public transport. Upon examining her account’s transaction history, credits were discovered that did not match her pension income and resulted in the seizure.
According to tax law, any balance not derived from salary or Social Security benefits is subject to garnishment. The woman argued that her balance was below the minimum monthly wage required for survival. The court agreed with her and ruled that her account could not be seized as it did not exceed the minimum vital amount needed for survival.
However, the Supreme Court criticized this initial ruling and emphasized that a thorough investigation into the origin and sources of funds in an account was necessary before any seizure could take place. The court ultimately upheld an appeal made by the Tax Management Body of the Barcelona Provincial Council, stating that while some of her income came from her pension, it also included other forms of income subject to seizure.
In conclusion, this ruling highlights the responsibility of citizens to prove their innocence when their bank accounts are seized by tax authorities. It also serves as a reminder that every individual has their own financial situation and may require additional scrutiny before any actions are taken against them.
