Ashotel asks Marichal to remain as president regardless of accusations
The executive committee of Ashotel has asked its president, Jorge Marichal, to remain in office considering that his sentence to two years in prison for tax fraud "is a strictly private matter and shouldn’t reflect on his work for the association." According to Ashotel in a statement, Marichal explained to the members of the committee in an urgent meeting yesterday "the details" of the sentence from the Criminal Court from July 8th 2019, ratified by the Provincial Court, on "a particular case that strictly affects his person".
At the end of his presentation, he put his position at the disposal of the committee and withdrew from the meeting so that they could deliberate, and they agreed to express their "unanimous support" to the president of Ashotel, who is also the president of the Spanish Confederation of Hotels and Tourist Accommodation (CEHAT), and asked for his continuity in the position.
The Ashotel committee said in a statement that “they endorse Marichal because of his leadership, training, passion, ability, dedication and desire that he has dedicated to the Tenerife employers since his first election in November 2011.”
They continued that he has always pursued "an objective of common good for the association and the Canarian tourism sector, a characteristic that has prevailed at all times in his daily work". In addition, they added that "a matter of a strictly personal matter should not interfere in the work of Ashotel" and that Jorge Marichal "is an excellent asset in the representation of the hotel tourism business."
Marichal announced on Monday that he would make his position available to CEHAT associates after being sentenced to two years in prison for a crime of tax fraud. In a statement, Marichal himself details that the file that gave rise to his conviction dates back to 2005, when the company Marmón Atlantis SL bought a property later converted into nine apartments that it sold four years later for 1.49 million euros to a related company.
At the time of signing, he stresses, 200,000 euros were paid on account and the payment of the rest was postponed to the next six months. The deferred price was not paid within the period initially provided for in the public deed "since this payment period was extended by a private agreement between the two companies."
Other articles that may interest you...
It was at that moment when, according to Marichal, there was "the technical error of not signing any public document that offered proof of the date and postponement because it was considered unnecessary as it was a verbal agreement between the two parties." The Treasury understands that there is no valid postponement and, therefore, the accrual of the tax in its entirety has occurred.