Tax investigator affair

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The tax investigator affair (sometimes also paranoia affair ) is a political affair with legal consequences about the alleged "elimination" of tax investigators in the successful performance of their official duties with the help of official instructions, transfers, organizational restructuring, psychiatric reports and compulsory retirement. You worked at the Frankfurt V tax office. The four Hessian tax investigators Rudolf Schmenger, Marco Wehner and the married couple Heiko and Tina Feser were attested in almost identical reports as having a "paranoid-querulous development" or an adjustment disorder . These officers were rehabilitated in the last instance in December 2015. The psychiatrist Thomas Holzmann, who also assumed that his behavior was largely correct after the judgment of the Giessen court in 2009, was sentenced to compensation in all four cases. The state of Hesse has offered to be reinstated, but has not yet promised to apologize and accept any further compensation payments (as of January 2017).

Activity of tax investigators

The forced retirement of civil servants fell during the term of office of the first state government under Roland Koch . In particular, the former Hessian Finance Minister Karlheinz Weimar was closely associated with the process.

Before their removal, the investigators in the so-called “banking team” at the Frankfurt V tax office had successfully taken action against tax evaders and from the mid-1990s until the time they were removed in 1999 they worked on a number of cases that dealt with Liechtenstein accounts.

The turnaround began in 1996 with the spectacular search in the boardroom of Commerzbank , during which boxes of files were confiscated. Commerzbank was accused of helping rich customers move their money to foreign accounts. The state got back around one billion euros in evaded taxes.

The Oberfinanzdirektion Frankfurt / Main officially recognized the officials of the so-called banking team in mid-2000.

At the beginning of the affair, the case of the Wren Foundation became public, in which the CDU Hessen, with the help of its advisor Horst Weyrauch, who was involved in the CDU donation affair, had hidden DM 20 million in Liechtenstein. Observers suspected a connection to the tax investigator affair.

By means of an "official decree" of August 30, 2001, it was determined that an initial suspicion of tax criminal law in the case of money transfers abroad should generally only be accepted in the future if the sums involved are over 300,000 (individual transfers) or 500,000 DM in total. All lower amounts are basically no longer to be processed by the tax investigation. In addition, proceedings should be transferred from Division V to other tax offices during the ongoing investigation. These provisions contradict the experience of the practice of denominations in the case of evasion and also the opinion of the public prosecutor's office.

The tax investigators expressed their concerns: If the ruling were applied, considerable tax claims of the public budgets against highly potent tax evaders would not be enforced and would be lost; this violates the principle of equality of taxation. In addition, they would be tempted to avoid punishment in office.

Relocation and countermeasures

As a result, more than a dozen critical tax investigators were transferred, eleven of them to the back office in other tax departments, two tax investigators and two department heads had to leave the tax investigation completely, including Rudolf Schmenger and Frank Wehrheim. Department V was closed because it was overstaffed, although staff had been requested prior to the conflict.

Rudolf Schmenger and some of his colleagues turned in vain to the Hessian Finance Minister Karlheinz Weimar and the Hessian Prime Minister Roland Koch. A petition to the Parliament's Petitions Committee was also unsuccessful. The requested permission to give evidence to file a criminal complaint with the public prosecutor's office was rejected.

judgment

In November 2009 the Administrative Court of Gießen, as a professional court for health professions, sentenced the expert Thomas Holzmann to a fine of 12,000 euros for deliberate false assessment. In its reasoning for the judgment, the court stated that Holzmann had intentionally failed to comply with the standards for psychiatric assessments in his reports. For example, he did not carry out any standardized tests. The court rejected the justification of the psychiatrist that he had attributed disease value to the subjects' “media behavior”. They had done public relations work for years, from which nothing came out that speaks for their assumption. "The fact that they continued to pursue the matter shows that they are not guided by rational considerations, but rather the concern to uncover something where there is perhaps nothing left to uncover." In the opinion of the court, this admission of the accused was not suitable for the expert opinion In this context, to remedy the deficiency of the violation of the principle of neutrality by the accused, "who does not even hypothetically consider that the statements of the test subjects could also partly or completely correspond to reality."

Jürgen Banzer , the then Minister for Labor, Family and Health of the State of Hesse , announced that the state recognized the verdict of the professional court and that no appeal would be lodged against the judgment. This made the judge's verdict final.

In December 2009, Finance Minister Weimar offered the four victims a return to the Hessian financial administration, which they did not accept because it was “disrespectful and inappropriate”. In January 2013, Finance Minister Schäfer renewed the offer to return from December 2009, which the four people concerned described as a "maneuver not meant seriously as a reaction to political pressure" with regard to their claims for damages.

In March 2013, the four tax investigators' claims for damages against the State of Hesse before the Frankfurt Regional Court were postponed to summer 2013. Based on a statement by the then spokesman for the Hessian Ministry of Finance to the editor of a business paper in 2009 that one of the tax investigators was suffering from " paranoia ", he sued the State of Hesse in a further process for a violation of his general personal rights for a monetary compensation of 20,000 euros . The Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt dismissed this action on July 14, 2014 in the court of appeal.

The psychiatric expert Thomas Holzmann was sentenced on December 3, 2015 in the last instance by the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court to pay damages for all four plaintiffs. In total, the appraiser has to pay 226,000 euros in damages to the four plaintiffs.

Higher demands had been cut by the regional court, as those affected could have accepted an offer from the state in 2009. Attorney Harald F. Nolte rejects these earlier offers as inappropriate. In addition, there is no apology from the country.

Parliamentary Committee of Inquiry

A parliamentary committee of inquiry in the Hessian state parliament brought no further results, especially since Rudolf Schmenger and Frank Wehrheim were not even summoned and questioned as witnesses.

On February 11, 2010, the investigative committee UNA 18/1 of the Hessian state parliament began its work under the leadership of the coalition parties CDU and FDP . It first met under the chairmanship of the FDP politician Leif Blum , until the latter suspended the office because of public prosecutor investigations into aiding and abetting tax evasion. His party friend Stefan Müller took over the office . In June 2010, the parliamentary groups of the SPD and the Greens appealed to the State Court of Justice because, in their opinion, the governing coalition would have changed the investigation mandate with requests for evidence. This is contrary to the constitution and violates their opposition rights.

Expert Holzmann told the investigative committee on November 21, 2011 that he had never in his life drawn up reports of convenience. A political connection could not be proven even afterwards.

Thomas Holzmann was denied a more detailed explanation of his substantive diagnoses in the investigation committee, as the four people concerned did not want to release him from his medical confidentiality. He declared his behavior overall as correct in accordance with his task, admitted only formal, but not substantive, weaknesses in his report and refuted the allegations of having followed instructions or advantages or having drawn up a courtesy report.

The committee of inquiry ended its work in May 2012 after 28 meetings with no mutual result. The CDU and FDP viewed all allegations as refuted, while the opposition parties continued to assume culpable behavior.

Legal dispute

Initially, none of the tax investigators concerned objected to the decision to retire. In the event of an official contradiction, a second reviewer might have been commissioned. In August 2009, Rudolf Schmenger and his former department head Frank Wehrheim finally filed a criminal complaint against Weimar and its press spokesman Scheerer. No investigations were started against Weimar, the investigations against Scheerer were discontinued.

In November 2009, the Vice President of the Saarland Finance Court, Peter Bilsdorfer , filed a criminal complaint for embezzlement of taxpayers' money against those responsible for the tax authorities and Minister Weimar.

On behalf of the Frankfurt Regional Court , Norbert Nedopil , head of forensic psychiatry at the Munich University Hospital , assessed the reports as "incomprehensible and inconsistent with current knowledge". According to his assessment, “from a psychiatric point of view, there were no medical prerequisites for permanent disability or partial disability ”.

reception

In the show The Story in the First of June 15, 2015 was u. a. the tax investigator affair thematized. Title of this broadcast: “The expert republic. When jurisdiction is privatized ".

The scandal was taken up in several publications; for example:

  • Sascha Adamek, Kim Otto: Beautifully rich - other people pay taxes: How unjust politics sweeten the life of the wealthy. Heyne 2009
  • Michael Gösele, Frank Wehrheim: Inside Tax Investigation: A tax investigator reveals the methods and secrets of the authority for the first time. Riva Publishing 2001

Whistleblower Prize

Rudolf Schmenger and Frank Wehrheim were awarded the Whistleblower Prize 2009 by the VDW and IALANA in Bad Boll on May 9, 2009 on the occasion of the “60 Years of Fundamental Rights” conference . The Association of German Scientists , co-founded by Carl-Friedrich von Weizsäcker , also awarded them the prize on behalf of their employees and their less successful predecessors, Klaus Förster , Werner Demant and Werner Borcharding . As an insider, according to the laudation, you would have made a decisive contribution to opening up a state area with its grievances to the critical public.

Both award winners persistently criticized the consequences of the “official decree” and the subsequent scandalous attrition and destruction of the entire critical tax investigation department, again and again with good reason. You have made the direct and indirect, legal and political consequences of these Hessian events transparent over the years - in a sequence of diverse forms of whistleblowing. As an insider, you have made a decisive contribution to opening up an important state area with its grievances to the critical public. That deserves great respect and public recognition.

literature

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ 'Paranoid-querulous'? Controversial expert opinions deal with the court. Accessed December 31, 2018 .
  2. ^ Matthias Thieme: Tax investigators who have been declared paranoid are being rehabilitated WAZ, December 13, 2015.
  3. ↑ Forced retirement: Hesse's finance minister comes under pressure in the tax investigator affair . In: Spiegel Online . January 2, 2010
  4. ↑ Matthias Thieme: Paranoia affair: How the state puts uncomfortable tax investigators in the cold . In: Capital . January 21, 2013
  5. ↑ Sascha Adamek, Kim Otto: Schön rich - Taxes are paid by others: How an unjust policy sweetens the life of the wealthy . Heyne Verlag, 2009, ISBN 978-3-641-03246-3 ( google.de [accessed on February 3, 2017]).
  6. ↑ a b c Whistleblower Prize 2009 for the Hessian tax researcher- anstageslicht.de. Retrieved February 3, 2017 .
  7. ↑ Frauke Hunfeld: Frankfurt tax investigation: Dismissed ice cold . In: Stern . No. 51, December 19, 2008
  8. ↑ Served ice cold . In: stern.de . December 19, 2008 ( stern.de [accessed February 3, 2017]).
  9. ^ AZ: 21 K 1220 / 09.GI.B; ECLI: DE: VGGIESS: 2009: 1116.21K1220.09.GI.B.0A
  10. ^ Matthias Bartsch: Verdict: Psychiatrist stopped tax investigators with dubious reports . In: Spiegel Online . November 17, 2009
  11. ^ Matthias Thieme: Tax investigator affair: court sees intent in psychiatrist Frankfurter Rundschau, December 10, 2009
  12. ^ Judgment of the VG Giessen - professional court for health professions from November 16, 2009 - 21 K 1220 / 09.GI.B line 11
  13. ↑ Incorrect reports: judgment against psychiatrists is legally binding Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, January 7, 2010
  14. ↑ Press release of the HMdF from December 2, 2009
  15. ↑ see also Hessenschau, December 2, 2009
  16. ↑ Press release of the HMdF from January 23, 2013
  17. ^ FR (print edition) of January 24, 2013: Right of return for tax investigators - State of Hesse wants to bring back officials who have been killed, but they distrust the offer
  18. ↑ The Neverending Story of Four Tax Investigators Die Welt, March 1, 2013
  19. ↑ AZ: 1 U 156/12; ECLI: DE: OLGHE: 2014: 0714.1U156.12.0A
  20. ↑ AZ: 6 U 35/14; ECLI: DE: OLGHE: 2015: 1203.6U35.14.0A
  21. ^ Christian Warnecke: Expert has to pay damages Frankfurter Neue Presse, December 4, 2015.
  22. ↑ Markus Zydra: Tax investigators who are wrongly retired receive compensation sueddeutsche.de, December 14, 2015
  23. ^ Frankfurter Neue Presse: Tax investigator affair: appraiser has to pay damages | Frankfurter Neue Presse . ( fnp.de [accessed on February 3, 2017]).
  24. ^ Frankfurter Neue Presse: Tax investigator affair: appraiser has to pay damages | Frankfurter Neue Presse . ( fnp.de [accessed on February 3, 2017]).
  25. ↑ Pitt von Bebenburg: Tax Investigator Affair: The coalition sees no scandal, nowhere . In: Frankfurter Rundschau . May 24, 2012
  26. ↑ Tax investigators investigation committee: SPD and Greens call the State Court . In: Hessische / Niedersächsische Allgemeine . June 7, 2010
  27. ↑ Ralf Euler: “To the best of my knowledge and belief” FAZ, November 22, 2011.
  28. ↑ Report UNA 18/1 of June 14, 2012 - Drs. 18/5800 HLT, page 177
  29. ↑ Tax investigator affair: U-Committee ends in a party clinch . In: hr-online.de . May 24, 2012
  30. ↑ Tax investigator affair  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. . @1@ 2Template: Toter Link / www.rtl-hessen.de  TV report from RTL Hessen . June 12, 2012
  31. ↑ Report UNA 18/1 of June 14, 2012 - Drs. 18/5800 HLT, pages 235, 237 and 239
  32. ↑ fr-online from August 5, 2009
  33. ↑ Wiesbaden Courier of March 26, 2010
  34. ^ Matthias Thieme & Pitt von Bebenburg: Tax investigator affair: Finance minister reported for breach of trust . In: Frankfurter Rundschau . November 18, 2009
  35. ^ Mobbing per diagnosis Der Spiegel, No. 51, December 17, 2012
  36. ↑ Tax investigators were apparently healthy Hessischer Rundfunk, December 17, 2012
  37. ^ Rudolf Schmenger and Frank Wehrheim: Excellent traitors . ( handelsblatt.com [accessed February 3, 2017]).
  38. ↑ Heide Platen: Scandal about Hessian tax investigators: fight for honor . In: the daily newspaper . ( taz.de [accessed on February 3, 2017]).
  39. ↑ Jury statement: Whistleblower Prize 2009 | Whistleblower network. Retrieved February 3, 2017 .