The regulatory framework delimiting the territorial jurisdiction in Tax Inspection is defined by Law 58/2003, of December 17, General Tax (hereinafter LGT ), by the General Regulation of the actions and procedures of tax management and inspection and development of the common rules of the procedures for the application of taxes (hereinafter RGAT ) and by the rules of organization of the Tax Administration.

Article 84 of the LGT , regarding jurisdiction in the application of taxes, refers us to what the tax administration determines in the development of its organizational powers through the corresponding provision, which must be published in the Official State Gazette. In the absence of an express provision, jurisdiction shall be assigned to the lower functional body in whose territorial area the tax domicile of the taxpayer is located.

For its part, art. 59 of the RGAT, which develops article 84 of the LGT , establishes criteria for the attribution of jurisdiction in the field of tax administrations. The general criterion for attributing territorial jurisdiction to the inspection bodies is determined by the tax domicile of the taxpayer at the start of the inspection proceedings , without any change in this domicile once the proceedings have started altering the jurisdiction of the acting inspection body.

However, in matters of jurisdiction, the specialities provided for in articles 106 and 107 of the RGAT must be taken into account for cases of concurrence of taxpayers and successors.

Thus, in the event of concurrence of taxpayers in the factual assumption of an obligation, the actions and procedures may be carried out with any of them, in accordance with the provisions of article 106 of RGAT .

In the case of actions or procedures relating to deceased individuals, or to dissolved or extinguished legal entities or other entities, the persons to whom, in accordance with the provisions of articles 39 and 40 of Law 58/2003, of December 17, General Tax Law, the corresponding rights, obligations and, where applicable, tax penalties are transferred, must act before the Administration, and the actions may be developed with any of the successors, as established in article 107 of RGAT .

In both cases, once a verification or investigation procedure has been initiated, this circumstance must be communicated to the other known taxpayers who may appear in the proceedings. The procedure will be unique and will continue with those who have appeared. Subsequent actions will be carried out with whoever is appropriate in each case.

The tax regulations also provide for the possibility of altering, under certain circumstances and under specific criteria, this rule of attribution of jurisdiction. Therefore, both article 84 of the LGT , and article 59 of the RGAT , refer in this matter to the specific organization rules , which will be those that establish the attribution of competence and the possibility that, in specific cases, actions may be carried out outside the usual scope of competence of the body.

These organisational rules are Order PRE/3581/2007, of 10 December, establishing the departments of the State Tax Administration Agency and assigning them functions and powers, and the Resolution of 24 March 1992 on the organisation and assignment of functions to the Tax Inspection within the scope of the Financial and Tax Inspection Department.

Specifically, section Four 3.3.4 of the Competence Resolution establishes the following: “When appropriate for the development of the tax control plan, the Director of the Financial and Tax Inspection Department may agree to extend the powers of the Regional Inspection Unit of a Special Delegation, or of the units integrated therein, to the territorial scope of other Special Delegations or of the Central Delegation of Large Taxpayers, after hearing the affected Delegates, in accordance with the provisions of article 5.2.e) of Order PRE/3581/2007, of December 10, which establishes the Departments of the State Tax Administration Agency and assigns it functions and powers .”

These agreements of the Director referred to in Section Four 3.3.4. The Resolution on Competences does not respond to an arbitrary action, but is carried out to comply with the purposes of the tax control plan.

The objective of the current competition regulations is to achieve, through the extension of competence, a greater adaptation to global economic realities and relations that are changing rapidly and continuously, without regional limits being a barrier. And all this for better tax control and the fight against fraud and tax evasion, seeking, on the one hand, to ensure the most homogeneous treatment of those tax risks that deserve it, regardless of where they are detected, allowing for greater efficiency in the Inspection of the Tax Agency, and, on the other hand, to improve the control of economic activities.

Finally, and to conclude, it is essential to highlight that the alteration of the territorial jurisdiction of the inspection bodies through the extension of jurisdiction must be justified and motivated, facilitating in any case adequate attention to the inspected taxpayers by carrying out, when necessary, the appropriate trips, or using the technologies that article 99.9 LGT and 151.1.e) make available to the inspection procedure.