A retired technical architect has not been able to get the Court to annul his forced registration in the Special Regime for Self-Employed Workers (RETA), so he will have to return 63,053.06 euros to Social Security. In this sense, the Superior Court of Justice of Castilla-La Mancha has not agreed with him, since the affected party tried to challenge out of time an administrative decision that he himself had consented to years ago and that he did not want to appeal at the time.
It all begins after an inspection by the Labor Inspection in 2015, they found this retiree (technical architect affiliated with the PREMAAT mutual insurance company) who continued to practice his profession, declaring net income of 50,538 euros in 2012 and 33,434 euros in 2013. The Inspection determined that, having already retired from his mutual insurance company, it stopped operating as an alternative system to RETA, so his professional activity It required immediate registration in the self-employed regime.
You may be interested
A retiree suffocated by debt: “I collect a pension of 800 euros and I owe a loan of 20,000 euros”
The OECD describes Spain’s pension system as unsustainable: without new reforms and envisions the future with higher taxes, lower pensions and a later retirement age
In the resolutions derived from that inspection, the General Treasury of Social Security (TGSS) proceeded to register him ex officio in the RETA with retroactive effects for the years 2012 and 2013. Due to this change, the Social Security declared the incompatibility of his retirement pension with the work performed, notifying him of an undue charge of 63,053.06 euros. This is so, since this is regulated by article 165 of Royal Legislative Decree 1/1994 (the former General Law of Social Security).
Faced with this situation, and despite the fact that in 2016 the architect paid the settlement and infringement certificates without appealing them, years later he tried to reverse the process. In November 2019, he submitted a request to process his withdrawal from the RETA dated 2012, seeking to annul the original administrative act. But the Social Security Treasury denied it, so he decided to go to court.
The mistake of not resorting on time
After going through the Social Court, this dispute reached the Superior Court of Justice of Castilla-La Mancha, which ruled in favor of Social Security. The ruling explains that it was nothing more than a confirmation of the original 2015 decision, which had become final because the architect did not present any appeal within the legal deadlines established at that time.
In this ruling the key is what is known as “consensual acts.” Basically, the Court explains that if the Administration makes a decision and you do not appeal it within the established period, it is understood that you agree with it and the matter is closed forever (it becomes “firm”).
Since the architect did not protest in 2015 and even paid the fines without question, he tacitly accepted his situation. Trying to request the same thing years later to generate a new response and thus be able to go to trial is, according to the judges, a trap to try to “revive” a claim period that had already been lost.
Thus and for everything explained, the Superior Court confirms the inadmissibility of the appeal, validating the finality of its registration in the RETA and condemning the appellant to pay the procedural costs, limited to a maximum of 2,000 euros.