The Plenary Session of the Senate generally approved the reform to the Federal Law of Contentious Administrative Procedure, which It would allow the Tax Administration System (SAT) to challenge judicial decisions, but when a reservation was voted, the opposition “busted” the session, so it was closed due to the lack of quorum.
However, the acting president of the Board of Directors, Verónica Camino, called a new session tonight.
READ: SAT denies massive freezing of bank accounts and home visits
Opposition senators expressed their rejection of this reform, warning that it is one more instrument to close citizens’ defense mechanisms against arbitrary and abusive decisions by authority, in this case fiscal.
Javier Corral Jurado, president of the Justice Commission, assured that this is a reform to meet the constitutional mandate that administrative courts resolve trials within a maximum period of six months.
“In addition, generic deadlines of five days are established in those actions carried out by the Federal Court of Administrative Justice, which currently do not provide deadlines.”
Opposition accuses “fiscal terrorism” after reform that expands powers of the SAT
However, the opposition accused that this is another reform to benefit the authority, since the modification of article 63 allows the SAT to have “a little protection” against resolutions in favor of a taxpayer, the PAN.
Ricardo Anaya, parliamentary coordinator of Acción Nacional, described the event as “fiscal terrorism.” He exemplified that if a citizen wins when their accounts are frozen “they will be blocked because they are giving the SAT an additional opportunity.”
PRI member Alejandro Moreno pointed out that “if you submit a request for a VAT refund and you have 10 audits behind you, then no one wants to submit anything anymore.”
“It gives the authority that has lost a matter a specific means of challenge,” said PAN member Guadalupe Murguía.
He exemplified that In the event that a citizen had won a trial and the order was to unfreeze their accounts, but the authority appealed, the accounts would remain frozen.
Luis Donaldo Colosio, from Movimiento Ciudadano, considered that “trials are unnecessarily prolonged and generates legal and financial uncertainty for those who litigate, pay taxes or depend on recovering resources to sustain their business.”
The initiative was approved in general with 64 votes in favor and 33 against and when a reservation was voted, the opposition realized that Morena and allies did not reach the quorum on their own, so they were absent to break up the session.
EE