Travel expenses consisting of fixed monthly amounts are not allowed as an exempt diet

The payment of amounts for travel expenses and expenses, claiming their exemption, must be proven by the taxpayer. In its judgment 321/2019, the Superior Court of Justice has ruled on the sanction filed against a worker who did not correctly justify the allowances paid by the company, considering that internal documents of own elaboration are not sufficient, reason for which you have dismissed your appeal.

Incorrect diets amount

The affected worker directed a contentious-administrative appeal against the decision of the Economic-Administrative Court of Murcia, which dismissed the claim against a previous agreement imposing a penalty of more than 2,000 euros.

The appellant alleges that it is true that a monthly amount is established as a allowance, which objectively is not correct, but that is due to a practical matter of the company based on the high volume of travel and maintenance expenses, and not an intentionality of evading tax obligations. It also understands that the monthly expense relationships have been delivered in a timely manner, attaching invoices that prove the expense, as well as the list of budgeted works that required a mandatory displacement.

For his part, the State Attorney points out that the displacements that have resulted in diet are not justified, so the question of the assumption is merely evidence, under article 105 of Law 58/2003. In this regard, the State Attorney considers that they have not been accredited that the amounts received for diets corresponded to said concept, and it is striking that he receives an amount practically identical to that which he receives for work income.

Need for accreditation

Article 17 of Law 35/2006 establishes that “full consideration of work shall be considered all consideration or profits, whatever their denomination or nature, monetary or in kind, which derive, directly or indirectly, from personal or personal work. labor relationship ”, while article 9 of Royal Decree 439/2007, of March 30 (IRPF Regulation) provides that the allocations for locomotion expenses and normal maintenance and stay expenses in hospitality establishments that meet the requirements and limits indicated in this article.

In any case, the question to be resolved is to determine if the plaintiff has proven her right to deduct the aforementioned allowances for being exempt, for which it must be taken into account that under art. 105 of the LGT “in the procedures for the application of taxes, those who claim their right must prove the facts of the same”, although it is true that they must do so with the evidence provided by the payer.

However, and as a similar judgment of the National Court of November 23, 2011, rec. 431/2010, the internal documentation prepared by the interested party is not sufficient, but external documentation of the concepts contained in the internal documents is necessary. Likewise, we must bear in mind that the nature of the diet is compensatory, as it intends to alleviate the worker’s expense, hence the sense of his exception, so that an amount of flat-rate and prior-rate diets, such as this case, it clashes with its nature.

In conclusion, “the payment of amounts for subsistence allowances and travel expenses, in order to exempt them, must be proven by the taxpayer and, for this purpose, internal documents prepared by them are not sufficient. In all, these documents could prove the payment of certain amounts, but not the reality and reason for them, which is one of the essential requirements to apply the exemption. “