The Double Administrative Instance: Guarantee of Justice and Equity in the Tax Litigation Process

The tax litigation process is a fundamental pillar in the legal system of any country, providing taxpayers with the opportunity to question the decisions of the tax authority when they perceive that these decisions have been applied incorrectly. In this context, the double administrative instance emerges as an element of vital importance, giving taxpayers two opportunities to review and rectify possible mistakes in the tax determination carried out by the tax inspection area of the Administration.

The double administrative instance stands as an essential guarantor of taxpayers' access to an equitable and fair process. This principle is fundamental for safeguarding the rights of taxpayers and preventing possible abuses by the tax inspection area of the Administration. The possibility of an independent review contributes significantly to transparency and accountability in the tax system.

There can occur mistakes at any stage of the tax process, whether in the determination of taxes, the interpretation of tax legislation or the imposition of tax sanctions. The double administrative instance enables an independent unit or court to review the decisions adopted by the tax inspection area and correct possible mistakes in the application of the rules or lack of understanding of the operations. This becomes exceptionally important in situations where the complexity of tax laws and regulations can lead to misinterpretations.

The double administrative instance contributes to build stability and legal security in the tax system. Taxpayers can trust that their tax disputes will be subject to impartial scrutiny and that the decisions made by this impartial subject are fair and based on current law. Therefore, this trust is essential for the efficient functioning of the economy and to promote investment, as taxpayers are assured that their rights are protected.

In addition, the double administrative instance can relieve the workload of judicial courts by resolving certain types of tax disputes before reaching the judicial instance. This is beneficial for both taxpayers and the justice system, becuase it speeds up the dispute resolution process and allows courts to focus on more complex cases.

A critical element to consider is taxpayers' perception of the opportunity to challenge tax decisions in a fair and effective manner through the dual administrative instance. This perception fosters a culture of tax compliance and it reduces tax evasion, as taxpayers are more willing to voluntarily comply with their tax obligations when they have confidence in an equitable system.

Therefore, the true guarantee of due process lies in the independence of judgment of each of the administrative instances. To achieve this, it is imperative that the first instance has to be as independent as possible from the tax inspection area of the Administration. This independence will be reflected in the resolutions of the first instance, which must seek to correct possible mistakes instead of simply confirming the decisions of the Administration itself. Furthermore, the resolutions of the second instance should be mandatory for the first instance, thus ensuring total independence between both instances with respect to the inspection unit of the Tax Administration.

The evident lack of compliance with the double administrative instance in many cases, where the administrative or fiscal Court frequently acts as the only independent instance before appeal to the judicial power, poses a significant problem. This results in an overload for taxpayers in complying with their tax obligations, as well as a general feeling of injustice and inequality in the application of the tax system.

In conclusion, it is imperative that tax systems undertake sustained efforts to reinfiorce the independence of administrative bodies. This measure is essential to guarantee an effective and fair tax litigation process, where taxpayers' rights are respected and where confidence in an equitable tax system is promoted. Only through a truly independent double administrative instance can the transparency, accountability and justice that is so needed in the tax field be achieved.