• via Alberto da Giussano, 26, 20145 Milano
  • +39 02 4003 1253
  • info@studiolegalebianucci.it
  • Criminal Lawyer, Family Lawyer, Divorce Lawyer

Cassation Criminal No. 44507 of 2024: Reflections on the Configurability of Specific Intent in Tax Evasion

The ruling No. 44507 of December 5, 2024, by the Court of Cassation offers significant food for thought on the topic of tax evasion, particularly regarding the configuration of specific intent in the offense of failing to submit the IRES declaration. The Court, examining the case of A.A., highlighted the importance of demonstrating not only the omission of the declaration but also the purpose of evading the tax, a crucial element for criminal liability.

The Ruling and Legal Principles

The Court of Appeal of Milan had confirmed the conviction of A.A. for failing to submit the IRES declaration for the year 2015, with evasion exceeding the threshold for criminal liability. However, the appeal to the Cassation questioned the sufficiency of the evidence of specific intent, which is essential for integrating the crime referred to in Article 5 of Legislative Decree No. 74 of 2000.

The configurability of specific intent for evasion requires rigorous proof of the intent to evade the tax; mere awareness of the failure to submit the declaration is not sufficient.

The Supreme Court emphasized that, although the defendant was aware of her responsibility, there was no evidence that her conduct was premeditated for evasion. The lack of maintaining accounting records and the absence of an accountant cannot, by themselves, be sufficient evidence to prove specific intent.

Specific Intent and the Principle of Beyond Reasonable Doubt

The cited ruling also highlights the importance of the principle of beyond reasonable doubt, fundamental in the criminal field. In this case, the Court found that the lower court judges had not adequately considered the reasonable doubt regarding the defendant's evasive intent. Elements such as the absence of a professional and the economic crisis of the company contributed to creating a picture of uncertainty.

  • Importance of proving specific intent in tax evasion.
  • Need to demonstrate the intent to evade the tax.
  • Relevance of the principle of beyond reasonable doubt.

Conclusions

The ruling of the Cassation No. 44507 of 2024 represents an important reminder for legal practitioners and those dealing with tax issues. It underscores the necessity of clear and unequivocal evidence of specific intent for the configurability of the offense of evasion, drawing attention to the delicacy of balancing the right of defense and the needs of establishing the criminal fact.