Assistance and representation in challenging administrative tax acts and in litigation against the tax authority, supported by a technical understanding of the substance, not only the procedure.
A tax audit report and a tax assessment are not final verdicts. They are acts of the administration that can be challenged — first administratively, then in court — and a significant proportion of them contain errors of substance, wrong premises or classifications that do not withstand rigorous technical analysis.
The problem is that most taxpayers either accept the established sum out of resignation, or challenge it superficially, without attacking the technical substance. Yet that is exactly where cases are won: in the calculation methodology, in the tax authority's premises, in the way the tax base was established or in the classification of an operation as fictitious.
The advantage of being an attorney, a tax adviser and a forensic tax expert is seen most clearly in tax litigation: I read the opposing report not only as a lawyer but as a tax technician, and I know where and how the authority's calculation gives way. The capacity of expert is, however, exercised separately from that of attorney — in the same case I cannot be both defender and expert, because the expert's independence is incompatible with representing a party.
The audit report and the tax assessment, read with a tax technician's eye: methodology, premises, classification. Where the authority's position gives way.
Building the challenge, with both technical and legal argument, and assessing whether to seek suspension of the enforcement of the established obligations.
The court action against the decision on the challenge, presenting the evidence and, where appropriate, the forensic tax expert report, in adversarial proceedings with the appointed expert.
Refusal of deduction on grounds of allegedly fictitious operations, transactions with suppliers declared inactive, VAT refunds blocked or refused. One of the most frequent and most contestable categories.
Expenses deemed non-deductible, recalculation of the tax base, the tax treatment of operations reclassified by the authority.
Adjustments of prices between related entities and challenging the transfer-pricing file — a technical area in which the specialist argument is decisive.
Protecting assets against the enforcement of the established obligations while the litigation is being resolved — an urgent step, with its own deadlines.
The deadline for challenging is regulated and generally runs from the date the assessment is communicated. It is a relatively short deadline, and missing it can close the avenue of challenge. This is why the first thing to do on receiving an assessment is to check the date of communication and consult a specialist quickly.
The administrative challenge is, as a general rule, a mandatory preliminary stage before you can turn to the court.
Challenging does not automatically suspend the payment obligation, and the tax authority may proceed to enforcement. There is, however, the possibility of seeking suspension of enforcement, under the conditions of the law, to protect your assets during the litigation. Assessing whether such a request is advisable and its prospects is part of the initial strategy.
In tax litigation, the technical evidence is often decisive. As an attorney, I understand how the tax authority's calculation is built and how it can be rebutted. Importantly, though: the two capacities are not combined in the same case — the expert's independence is incompatible with representing a party.
In practice, if I represent you as attorney, the party-appointed expertise is carried out by another expert, and I use it strategically in the proceedings. If I act as expert, I do so exclusively in that capacity. In both options, you have someone who masters both the tax substance and the procedure — without the roles being confused.
The administrative side — the challenge and the litigation — and the criminal side are distinct procedures, but often connected. This page concerns the administrative side. The criminal component is dealt with in the economic criminal law section. The advantage of coordinating the two as a whole is considerable, because the strategy must be thought through together.
The deadlines for challenging run from the date of communication. An early assessment establishes whether and on what basis a challenge can be built, and what must be protected immediately.