This last week has been Marcelo (Real Madrid soccer player) who will reach an agreement with the Prosecutor’s Office for a ruling in which he is found guilty of a tax crime for the 2013 fiscal year of Personal Income Tax ( IRPF). Not long ago the agreement was reached by Mascherano (soccer player, ex of the FC Barcelona).


It seems that the exemplified condemnation that fell on Messi (soccer player of FC Barcelona) has slowed down the spirits of many soccer players who, when threatened by a criminal trial for presumed fiscal crime, prefer to assume guilt and plead guilty and of this Avoid hearing the oral trial and see how the Attorney General’s office and the Attorney General’s office greatly reduce their punitive claims.


When I write about undeserved condemnation about Messi I do so from the utmost respect for both the Judgment of the Provincial Court of Barcelona and the Supreme Court, but that respect does not oblige me to assume the thesis of deliberate ignorance.


To my point of view, the FC Barcelona player never had the control of the fact that he could become the author of the crime of fraud to the Tax Agency, since, the player of 18 years of age when the complex plot of Assignment of its image rights to several affiliated companies outside the territory of the Kingdom of Spain, it is almost impossible that he had sufficient knowledge to orchestrate such a business circuit. In addition, the tax crime requires a specific fraud aimed at avoiding tax liabilities, and the reverse of the fraud is the prohibition error.


In this same sense Mascherano or Marcelo can hardly know the difference between I.R.P.F. or the Corporate Tax (I.S.), or if a certain amount must be taxed by one or other tax, since they are technical questions that athletes do not know, since they do not have legal legal technical training in this regard.


We do not lose sight of the fact that the Criminal Code in art. 305 typifies the action of avoiding the payment of taxes, and that when an athlete pays his image rights by a commercial company, if the commercial contracts are correctly executed according to current legislation, the taxation outside the I.R.P.F. It has no reason to be assessed by the State Attorney, or the Prosecutor’s Office or the courts or tribunals as “to avoid payment of taxes.”


If the sportsman is taxed by the I.S. It does not do it to circumvent the payment, rather it does it because its advisors so recommend it.


Finally, it is good to analyze the reasons why judges of sportsmen who are immersed in these problems of criminal jurisdiction are not prosecuted, since, as a tax crime, the tax advisors should, at least, give the pertinent explanations before courts and tribunals to see if athletes really are the perpetrators of these crimes or on the contrary are the advisors who decide technically instead of the athletes.


In our view, a dose of greater professional courage would be convenient for the part of the advisors to assume responsibilities and not to leave alone the danger to athletes, who are not responsible for many of the legal dislodges in which they are immersed .