Although in many cases this goes unnoticed by consumers, several service stations charge – with the consumption ticket for their fuel – a circulation tax for the Municipalities to finance road works.
Although stations have resisted this municipal initiative for years, in many of them the fee continues to increase already high fuel prices.
This is demonstrated by a study by the Confederation of Hydrocarbon Trade of the Argentine Republic (CECHA). in Pinamar, for example, a 3% tariff is applied. on the value of the price per litre, while in the Merlo the increase is 2.5%; in Ituzaingó, 2% and in Rosario; by 1.6%.
Tigre, Escobar and Florencio Varela stations also apply an additional 1% on the price of petrol and Avellaneda receives another 0.6%. The suppliers of the Municipalities of Vicente Lopez and San Isidro, in turn, receive rates of 0.88% and 4.39% respectively.
There are also municipalities that charge a fixed amount. This is the case of José C. Paz, with $5.10; San Isidro, with $4.39; Vicente López with $0.88; San Fernando, with $1.28; Castles, with $4, and Hurlingham, with $0.85.
Faced with this situation, gas stations continue to report the unconstitutionality of the measure. As Isabelino Rodriguez, president of CECHA, explained, “it is a double taxation – municipal and national – for which we pay taxes and it is not fair because It hurts stations that have to sell fuel at a higher price and they lose competitiveness compared to other stations in neighboring municipalities”, commented the director.
Another argument put forward by station owners, among others, is the principle of reasonableness: “It does not seem reasonable to have a tax that cannot demonstrate and verify the provision of the service, i.e. the verification of the actual consideration, or “the link between the amount charged and the actual cost of the service could not be reasonably justified.”other Chambers such as FAENI and CESGAR explained.
For this reason, entrepreneurs aim to adjudicate the complaint. At the request of CECHA, the constitutionalist Daniel Sabsay carried out an analysis on the constitutionality of the road taxes of the various Municipalities of the Province of Buenos Aires.
In legal terms and among other reasons, the expert explained: “since the municipalities of Buenos Aires participate in the tax on liquid fuels created by law 23.966, “The establishment of a tax on an already taxed good, such as vehicle tax, generates double taxation which conflicts with the constitutional regime”, She said.
“Furthermore, law decree 505/58, to which the Province of Buenos Aires joined with law decree 7374/66, creates the National Highway Directorate and, in its article 29 c. c), commits the provinces and municipalities of do not establish local taxes on liquid fuels and lubricants with any tax,” the lawyer continued.
“The mere contrast between the literalness of Law 23,966 and the municipal ordinances allows us to appreciate that we are in the presence of identical taxes and taxpayers. So yes double taxation and the consequent unconstitutionality of road taxes”, He explained.
Source: Clarin
