AFA President Claudio Tapia charged over alleged tax evasion

A Buenos Aires City court specializing in economic crimes has formally charged  the president of the Argentine Football Association (AFA), Claudio “Chiqui” Tapia, and several executives for alleged tax evasion. The investigation stems from a complaint filed by the customs and control agency ARCA, which detected the alleged failure to deposit withheld sums for taxes and social security contributions.  According to the ruling by Judge Diego Amarante, investigators verified a “failure to pay sworn tax statements by their legal deadline” linked to various fiscal and social security obligations. In addition to Tapia, the other defendants charged are treasurer Pablo Toviggino, general manager Gustavo Lorenzo, and general secretaries Cristian Malaspina and Víctor Blanco, as well as the AFA as a legal entity. Tapia and Pablo Toviggino have each had assets frozen for AR$350 million pesos (US250,000 dollars at the official exchange rate). Maneuvers under investigation According to the court ruling, the case centers on the alleged failure to deposit funds withheld for VAT, income tax, and social security contributions within 30 days of their due dates. The sums involved — detailed in extensive spreadsheets included in the ruling — reach into the millions of dollars and correspond to periods between 2024 and 2025. Legally, each failed payment is being  treated as a separate act. The conduct was provisionally classified as “tax evasion” and “misappropriation of social security funds” under Law 27.430, with the aggravating circumstance that more than one person was involved. The roles of the accused The ruling also examines the alleged involvement of each defendant.  In Tapia’s case, he is identified as AFA president and administrator of the entity’s tax identification number. According to the court, the role entails responsibility before tax authorities. Víctor Blanco is charged in connection with acts allegedly committed before April 2025, while Cristian Malaspina faces charges tied to the period after assuming the role of general secretary. The defense’s arguments During questioning, several defendants denied responsibility and sought to distance themselves from tax-related operations. The AFA’s defense focused on three main arguments: lack of direct involvement, disputes over applicable due dates, and the absence of criminal intent.  A central claim was that the payments were ultimately made, albeit under a different interpretation of the deadlines. The defense also argued that the AFA acted in good faith, stating it had deposited the full withheld amounts, along with “compensatory interest.” Gustavo Lorenzo said he was “not involved in any management related to the execution, determination, ordering, or payment of taxes.” He described  his duties as “purely protocol-related.” Cristian Malaspina similarly stated, “I have no involvement in decisions regarding the taxes whose late payment is alleged in this case,” adding that his position does not include financial responsibilities. Víctor Blanco also denied involvement in tax management, describing his role as “essentially institutional and protocol-related, without any intervention in tax or social security operations.” Originally published in Ambito