The Tax
cause perde
A Maramotti go
50mila euro

The Internal Revenue Service asked the owner of Max Mara 45 million in penalties and alleged tax evaded, but the Tax Commission has accepted the appeal of the entrepreneur

Luigi Maramotti (Foto Artioli)
Luigi Maramotti (Photo Artioli)

Reggio Emilia, 22 January 2010. The IRS wanted Luigi Maramotti 45 million, between sanctions and alleged tax evaded, but eventually he will have to pay 50 thousand euros entrepreneur.

And 'what it cost the Agency revenue, including fees for lawyers and rights, The action brought by the owner of Max Mara, who had to defend accusations of tax evasion.

The section 4 of the Committee provincial tax has in fact received, July 1 last, The action brought by the owner of Max Mara, who had been accused of evading 23 million in corporate income taxes between, IRES and IRAP, in the years between 2003 and the 2006.

A Maramotti Agency Revenue also asked 22 million penalties. Throughout 45 million.

According to the Finance and the Inland Revenue was found that, checks from Marina Rinaldi, they would have found evidence to support the International fashion trading company, with branch offices in Lugano and the homonymous Luxembourg company owned 46% the Max Mara Finance, was in fact a dependence of the cheese.

This, second the Inland Revenue, would have been sufficient to configure the presence of a company esterovestita, which is used only to pay less tax.

But the committee tax has literally taken apart the prosecution's. We read in the judgment: "The Board shall set aside the notice of assessment for absolute uncertainty as to the identity (legal, composition, headquarters, representation), the identification and existence of the autonomous subject of rights, central charge of negotiating situations and procedural issues which were supposed to head the tax obligations established ".

In essence, the Board argued that it was not possible to "determine what type of income tax was applicable (personal income or corporation tax)"And that, also, Luigi Maramotti was impossible to determine which was the legal representative, given that "not one of the numerous documents bore his signature".

Also, as regards the alleged esterovestizione, The Committee notes that "no other evidence has been provided in order to verify and demonstrate that the actual seat of the International fashion trading was in Italy».

Adds the Board: "Even the reasons that tax, according to the office would have led to the creation of the branch confederated Ift, does not appear reliable '. And more: the purpose of relocating the revenue in a territory that has a favorable tax regime than the national "do not appear demonstrated".

The documentation by the applicants, in fact, the Lugano branch "appears to have been subject to tax in Switzerland in the ordinary regime, also the same has never resorted to procedures ruling the Helvetic confederation, and has not received any forfeiture of income '.

As a result of all these observations, The Committee 'declares the nullity and the absolute ineffectiveness of the notification of the investigation carried out by Luigi Maramotti for lack of legitimation and representation powers of taxable bonds unidentified tax assessed ".
The story may not end here because the Inland Revenue has until mid-March to appeal.

The 3 March, then, Judge preliminary hearing, Baraldi Angela, decide on a possible indictment for Luigi Maramotti, patron of Max Mara, who was accused by the prosecutor in Reggio declaration of tax evasion for failing to.

Targeted by the Guardia di Finanza there are amounts that would be dealt with between the 2003 and the 2006. The criminal investigation against Maramotti and tax last year are very similar, but it may not even cover the same topic.

Join the Forum discussion on this post