Published On: Thu, Feb 6th, 2014

Dutch ‘Fraud hunter” funnels thousands away through Curacao

Justice AmsterdamWILLEMSTAD - Former prosecutor and prominent member of the political party VVD, Matthieu van S. Has paid himself in recent years, almost a quarter of a million euro through companies established in Curacao and the Caribbean island of Anguila. Payments, which Van S., held hidden from the tax authorities. This is evidenced by an anonymous statement of the tax court, which is owned by the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf.

The verdict indicates that Van S. (53), during his work as a prosecutor at the Amsterdam Court, had sent invoices to several former clients of the law firm Lovells, where he had been employed a few years earlier as a lawyer.

Clients for whom the plaintiff had continued to work as a lawyer after his resignation had to pay for his services through the Luxembourg bank account of Van S.’ company located in Curacao. In addition, Van S. hid the profits from the sale of his Amsterdam apartment in 2007 at a company on the sunny and tax-friendly island of Anguila, which was operated by a company located in Portugal.

Matthieu van Sint Truiden (VVD)The Tax Collector discovered the hidden cash flows in 2011 and laid additional tax assessments on the prosecutor last year in. Van S., now a suspect in a criminal investigation for tax fraud, would have needed extra money after his divorce, and he had extremely high alimony obligations.

The former prosecutor challenged the additional tax assessments with the tax court recently, but his petition was rejected this past week. Also the explicit request of Van S. not to publish the verdict was rejected by the court.

The Dutch Fiscal Information and Investigation Service (FIOD) discovered Van S.’ tax fraud in 2011, while he was still president of the VVD’s National Police and Justice party committee at that time. A few months later, he was fired from the court. The criminal investigation against the prosecutor was more than half a year long suppressed by the judiciary.

After his resignation, it became clear that the Public Prosecutor had ignored various signals. He was appointed by the court as prosecutor without any proper screening.

Source: De Telegraaf

Click Tag(s) for Related Articles: