AFIP calls for investigation of Calcaterra and its funeral partners

The Federal Administration of Public Revenue (AFIP) He asked the opening of an investigation on the businessmen and former executives of the Brazilian construction company Odebrecht, Iecsa (then cousin of the president). Mauricio Macri, Angelo Calcaterra) and the Italian Ghella for alleged escape aggravated by the deviation of nearly $ 5 million from the burial works of the Sarmiento Railway. This is stated in the document to which he has subscribed PROFILE.

The Treasury argued in its presentation before the federal judge Marcelo Martínez De Giorgi that the legal representatives and board members of these companies are accountable for a "fictitious" contract that they allegedly signed in December 2010 for allegedly transferring burial funds to a "screen" company, according to the presentation of the agency. PROFILE and The nation they report the suspicions surrounding this alleged maneuver.

Calcaterra confessed that the money had been handed over by his order

AFIP claims to have been able to verify the "undocumented departures" of a bank account based in Buenos Aires and on behalf of the Nuevo Sarmiento consortium (Iecsa, Odebrecht, Ghella and Comsa) with a Spanish company known by several names: DSC, DSC Workshop and "Detection of technical risks, quality control and supervision of Obras de Edificación SA", based in Madrid.

In December 2010, this company agreed to provide "commercial, professional and technical services" to the burial works for an amount of $ 10,316,253, in accordance with the contract included in the file. Now, AFIP is redoubling the bet and asking the questions "immediately" because it fears that the cause does not prescribe it.

AFIP complicates Iecsa with evidence of alleged bribes for US $ 5 million

The body argues that all the documents submitted by Iecsa to justice and the Treasury "would not only be apocryphal, but would be a maneuver to obtain funds with a destiny different from that of a real market contractor ".
Federal Judge Marcelo Martínez de Giorgi felt that there was not enough evidence yet to sue employers, including Calcaterra, for allegedly paying bribes. For this reason, he dictated the lack of merit for almost all the poor imputed in the case. The Federal Chamber examines this decision.

The DGI technicians who badyzed these contracts and movements were categorical in the Argentine courts: the contract in question would be "simulated" or "fictitious" and its sole purpose would be to divert funds abroad "for misleading purposes ", confirmed cause

Near Calcaterra, they badure that this contract was legal and that the Spanish company worked on the work plans. His lawyers presented photocopies of the plans with a DSC seal before the judge. However, when the public prosecutor badyzed the documentation, he found that the plans had been drawn up by an Argentine company, Ingroup. Iecsa stated that DSC had carried out the "quality control" of the plans.

However, the company did not provide e-mail or proof of communication or delivery of the plans to the Madrid-based company. There is also no record of the "quality control" report allegedly made by DSC for the Nuevo Sarmiento consortium. Therefore, AFIP spoke in its presentation of the "ideological lie in the implementation of contracts".

They ask the intervention of the work to bury Sarmiento

The Directorate General of Taxes (DGI) has launched an inspection and asked the companies documentation to guarantee this contract and bank transfers to the Spanish company. However, in its recent court appearance, the agency stated: "At no time was the minutes referred to in the contract provided, the payrolls of the staff with whom he had contact, exchanges of ideas or opinions, instructions given to the counterparty (the latter being of the highest importance in writing), or any other evidence indicating the relationship that could have been maintained with the employee, which shows the low credibility of a contract with these characteristics in order to manifest informality ". The agency also criticized "the fact that no part of the agreements has been incorporated concerning the liability and / or compensation of the contracting party.

ED / MC