The controversy surrounding the VIP list of contributors brought to public discussion the issue of data protection for citizens in general and public office holders or sovereignty in particular. Three tax specialists contacted by the PUBLIC clearly assume the defense of the two levels, without jeopardizing any conflict of rights or discrimination of taxpayers.
Rogério Fernandes Ferreira, president of the Portuguese Fiscal Association, and former Secretary of State for Fiscal Affairs, was among the first to argue that considers justifiable that the computer system of tax administration has an alert system, not for certain people, but for holders of certain public functions, similar to what happens with other public entities. For this lawyer, this system of greater protection of public office holders, who are also the most scrutinized, is not incompatible with the existence of rules that protect other citizens of unauthorized access to your data.
Asked about whether special reserve exist in access to tax data of persons who occupy certain public offices, Samuel Fernandes de Almeida believes that the term is not “special reserve, but tighter controls on access to tax data office holders Public and sovereign bodies, like the President, the Prime Minister, the members of the STA, among others. “
” In spite of the principle of legality, equality of taxpayers, does not shock me on the contrary, that access to this data is restricted and their access is justified by the officials of the tax authorities “, says this expert in tax law and partner at Miranda.
For that lawyer,” the more restricted access, could not under any circumstances represent any form of limitation or condition the operation of the Tax Authority, including a power of control and inspective powers. That is, such a measure could never be exploited to subtract these holders of their reporting obligations and inspective power of AT, particularly in sensitive matters such as signs of wealth and income control abroad for example. “
The most conditioning does not entail, for Samuel Fernandes de Almeida, who neglect the protection of citizens. “It does not appear acceptable to the citizen in a rule of law are subject to a kind of tax voyeurism. What this case highlights the VIP list is that there are no effective mechanisms to control access to tax information from taxpayers, which is serious and violating their rights “, says the lawyer, adding that” there is understood that any employee AT can access tax data of any taxpayer. “
For this expert, would justify the” creation of degrees of access to certain features and categories of its employee (…) where in the case of holders of public office that same access would be restricted and conditioned to fewer employees and inspecting and management functions. “
” It is not of course to reduce or narrow the inspective powers and the access to information by the AT, but to regulate access to such data, linking the protection of the financial interests of the State and the private life of its citizens, “concluded Samuel Fernandes de Almeida.
Pedro Botelho Gomes, partner of José Pedro Aguiar Branco and Associates, argues that “what should always prevail and foremost is the principle of tax secrecy”. Said that, “the taxpayers’ side this principle is materialized in the right of everyone to have exclusive access to their own data.” For this lawyer, “different issue is the access of TA staff to all data and every citizen”.
“Obviously any internal security system of services in the control of the surveyed data sheets and accessed by computer is expected to be implemented strictly in the same terms for all taxpayers, “he argues.
For Pedro Botelho Gomes, given the” concentration of collection services and cross-checks in AT, always with a view to effectively combating tax evasion, there need to implement technical control tools that did not exist or were necessary under where they are today. “
