The National Court agrees with the former footballer against the Tax Agency, which claimed the said amount as personal income tax for the years 2013 and 2014.
Dani Alves has achieved a victory ‘valued’ in 2 million euros about Hacienda After the National audience has agreed with the former footballer in a ruling to which he has had access for the first time The Spanish Newspaper, from Prensa Ibérica. The Brazilian, who has been in provisional detention since January in the Catalan prison of Brians 2 accused of a crime of sexual assaulthas managed to get the court to agree with him about how he transferred the income obtained from his image rights when he was a player of the FC Barcelona.
Alves, who had to advance that money or guarantee it in some way, received on December 7, 2016 a settlement agreement from the Regional Inspection Unit of Catalonia in which 2,008,863 euros were demanded from him as part of the inspections to which both he and the companies in which he was a shareholder were being subjected.
As reported by El Confidencialin April 2022 The Treasury seized 50% of a home owned by Dani Alves “in claim of 2,088,979.57 euros in principal and 170,091.65 euros in interest” that the player owed to the treasury. This newspaper has contacted its legal representation, who did not want to comment on the matter.
Within the framework of the actions that led to this debt, the Treasury inspection focused on Cedro Esport, SL, a company of which Alves was a partner and administrator and to which he transferred his image rights when he signed for FC Barcelona in the summer of 2008. In exchange, that company of which he owned 50% with his ex-wife, agreed to pay him “1.6 million euros payable in sixteen annual payments that would begin to be collected when he finished his professional activity as a footballer or when both parties so decided”, to which a “variable based on objectives with the same conditions” would have to be added.
Transfer of rights to Barça
Cedro Esport SL, explains the ruling of the National Court on October 4, gave way on July 2, 2008 (the day the player was officially transferred from the Sevilla FC) “the commercial use of the player’s image rights” to Barça during the “validity of the footballer’s employment contract” with the Catalan entity.
The price agreed in exchange for that transfer was 3.180.000 euros at a rate of 795,000 euros per season, 300,000 as a bonus for said transfer and a variable, amounts that were updated in March 2011, when he renewed as a culé. For the 2012/13 season the amount was updated to 900,000 euros and in 2013/14 it was 1,050,000 euros plus the variable part. To that we would have to add, the inspection said, the rest of the revenues that Cedro Esport obtained from the image rights of Dani Alves, such as the almost million euros billed to Adidas between 2013 and 2014, the 10,000 euros to Panini or the 65,700 euros of Gillette.
The alleged undue discrepancy that the Treasury inspection accused him of between what the company billed for these rights and what it later paid to the former soccer player himself is what ended up leading to that “controversial regularization” of 2 million euros for “the valuation at market price of the benefit received by (Dani Alves) for the transfer of image rights to Cedro Esport, SL”.
However, now the National audience estimates that what was ruled by the Treasury inspection and that was validated in 2019 by the Central Administrative Economic Court (TEAC) leads to a “completely irrational solution” and to the “incorrectness of the method used” in the procedure, which leads to agreeing with the footballer and estimating a resource that is ‘worth’ 2 million euros.
“The result obtained is that society perceives income much lower than expenses what it incurs for it. As this result is unsatisfactory, since it leads to a completely irrational solution and is thus admitted in the settlement agreement itself, it is resolved by establishing that the market value of the image rights transferred by the man (Dani Alves) is €0. in both exercises. But, after all, with this solution the incorrectness of the method used due to the irrational results to which it leads and determines that we must also consider this reason for the appeal,” concludes the ruling of the National audience.