Furs presented the details of the proceedings against Senica Law Firm

The Financial Authority has clarified why it blocked the bank accounts of the law firm Senica, which is owned by former Interior Minister Katarina Kresal. The firm, known for its legal work with prominent figures, faces financial difficulties, including unpaid taxes and debts owed to the state. According to reports, the firm’s bank accounts were frozen after a tax inspection revealed discrepancies related to the years 2020 and 2021. The Financial Authority stated that the firm had failed to comply with the Law on Legal Professions, leading to the imposition of additional taxes and contributions. Kresal, who co-owns the law firm along with attorney Mira Senica, explained during a televised appearance on POP TV that the block was based on an inspection conducted over two years ago. She claimed that the authorities incorrectly applied the law, failing to consider the specific regulations governing legal professionals. “They unlawfully assessed additional taxes and contributions because they did not take into account the law regulating the activities of lawyers,” she said. Kresal added that the firm had submitted a complaint, and the Financial Authority temporarily halted the enforcement of the tax debt, believing there was a chance the appeal would succeed. However, the contribution portion remained unaffected, as the law does not allow for such delays. The Financial Authority responded by releasing detailed information about the case. It confirmed that the firm had been placed on a list of tax debtors since July 25th, having accumulated between 300,000 and 500,000 euros in unpaid taxes. The firm currently holds only a fiduciary account, which is used to store client funds rather than personal assets. Despite this, the firm has three active accounts abroad. The authority noted that while the firm had filed a complaint against the initial decision, the process continued for the remaining unpaid obligations. They emphasized that all payments received from clients are recorded and considered when determining whether debts have been settled. Kresal and her associates continue to dispute the legality of the measures taken by the Financial Authority. They argue that the firm has already paid some of the outstanding amounts and that the current block is unjustified. “We still await a decision from the Financial Authority regarding reducing the amount we’ve already paid,” Kresal said. “They haven’t taken into account recent payments made within the past few months.” The firm claims that the current situation is a result of an unlawful action and that the Financial Authority’s approach contradicts sound judgment. The Financial Authority maintains that all payments received are properly documented and accounted for. They reiterated that while the enforcement of the tax debt was temporarily suspended due to the pending appeal, the contributions could not be delayed under the existing legal framework. The authority also pointed out that the firm had voluntarily disclosed information about its tax proceedings, which typically remain confidential. This disclosure, they argued, did not compromise any sensitive data. Kresal and the law firm have requested further clarification from the Financial Authority, expressing concerns about the fairness and legality of the ongoing procedures. Their response highlights their belief that the actions taken by the Financial Authority are both unexpected and contrary to common sense. They have called for a more transparent and reasonable approach to resolving the matter, emphasizing the need for a fair assessment of their financial responsibilities. As the situation continues to unfold, both parties remain engaged in discussions aimed at reaching a resolution.