Patricio Urresti: «Temas de Derecho Tributario de la Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires»

Tax-Enforcement Proceedings in the City of Buenos Aires

Patricio Urresti discusses the distinctive features of tax-enforcement proceedings in the City of Buenos Aires, drawing on his experience in the city’s administrative litigation courts and on the case law collected for the book.

Judicial, Not Administrative, Enforcement

Urresti contrasts Buenos Aires City’s approach with federal and other provincial systems, where tax authorities may have broader powers to collect debts. In his account, the city’s legislature did not adopt that model: judges order precautionary measures, and enforcement proceeds through the courts. Court officers—not the tax authority itself—handle payment demands.

Challenges to an Enforcement Claim

The grounds for challenging an enforcement claim are not limited to the exceptions expressly listed in the procedural code. Article 451 specifies certain exceptions, but Urresti argues that other objections may also be heard when they challenge the court’s jurisdiction or the regularity of the enforcement title. These include lack of jurisdiction, lack of standing, res judicata, and related procedural objections.

Defenses Considered by the Courts

• Payment: Taxpayers may rely on proof of payment, including bank receipts. Problems between a bank authorized to collect taxes and the city should not necessarily be attributed to the taxpayer.
• Compensation: Although it may not be expressly listed as an exception, compensation may be relevant because it extinguishes the tax obligation.
• Lack of passive standing: This defense may apply when the person sued is not legally responsible for the tax—for example, in disputes involving property transfers or an alleged employment relationship.
• Defects in the enforcement title: Formal defects, such as a missing signature, may undermine the title. Urresti also discusses challenges based on flaws in the preceding administrative process, including defective notice of a tax determination.
• Manifestly unenforceable debts: Courts may consider whether a debt is clearly unenforceable, sometimes where evidence is needed to assess the claim. Examples include disputes over whether a taxable relationship existed and fines that were not yet enforceable.

Limitation Periods and Case Expiry

Urresti describes an unresolved tension between the city’s authority to regulate its own tax limitation periods and national civil-law rules. The debate includes which rules apply to claims that arose before the current Civil and Commercial Code.

He also questions the limitation period for enforcing a final judgment. Allowing a long period to enforce a judgment could be unreasonable, he suggests, while acknowledging uncertainty about the city’s authority to set that period.

Urresti criticizes applying the same six-month period for case expiry to both summary tax-enforcement proceedings and ordinary proceedings. In his view, an expedited process intended to help the state collect debts should not necessarily be subject to the same expiry rule as an ordinary case.

The Reasonable-Time Guarantee

Urresti notes the growing importance of the reasonable-time guarantee under the American Convention on Human Rights. He questions how a tax-enforcement case could justifiably last many years, particularly when authorities have not made timely efforts to notify or pursue the debtor.

Speakers and Sources

• Speakers: The introductory moderator, who hands over to Patricio Urresti, the main speaker. The moderator is identified as Ernesto Gómez Zamancola in the video context.
• Legal sources discussed: Article 451 of the city’s procedural code; Federal Tax Procedure Law 11,683; Law 25,239; the National Civil and Commercial Code; and the American Convention on Human Rights.
• Cases, courts, and commentators referenced: City and national court jurisprudence, including discussion of the Filcrosa precedent; José Osvaldo Casás; Rosatti; and commentators whose names appear in the captions as Rodrigo and Naveira. Some names and legal references are unclear because the subtitles are auto-generated.