The case against AFA moves forward: tax and stock market secrecy lifted for 'Chiqui' Tapia

The justice system took a new step in one of the most sensitive cases facing the Argentine Football Association (AFA). Economic Criminal Court Judge Diego Amarante decided to lift the tax and stock market secrecy of the president of the entity, Claudio "Chiqui" Tapia, within the framework of an investigation for alleged misappropriation of social security contributions.

The judicial decision is part of a broader offensive aimed at clarifying the management of public funds withheld by AFA and that, according to the accusation, allegedly were not paid into the social security system in a timely and proper manner. The lifting of secrecy will allow access to key information on the official's financial, asset, and stock market movements.

The measure covers the entire board of directors

The court ruling is not limited to AFA's president. It also covers his main collaborator, treasurer Pablo Toviggino, as well as other members of the board of directors: secretary general Cristian Ariel Malaspina and general director Gustavo Lorenzo.

In addition, Judge Amarante ordered the judicial recess to be lifted, a sign of the degree of urgency and importance that the justice system assigns to the investigation, in order to determine whether there was indeed a misappropriation of social security contributions for an estimated amount of $19,000 million, as ARCA claims.

The prosecutor's indictment and Tapia's role

Last week, Economic Criminal Prosecutor Claudio Navas Rial formally charged Tapia on the basis of a request stemming from a complaint filed by the tax collection agency. According to the accusation, AFA has a debt of more than $19,000 million corresponding to the last two years.

The indictment keeps that the entity allegedly withheld taxes and social security contributions from its own employees and from Argentine football clubs without paying them within the legal deadline established by the Criminal Tax Regime. In his opinion, the prosecutor attributed direct responsibility to Tapia for his institutional role and for his administration of the association's tax code.

Given the magnitude of the amounts under investigation and AFA's economic structure, the prosecutor considered it necessary to extend the investigation to the rest of the leadership, on the grounds that the directors allegedly took part in the management and disposition of the funds under analysis.

The origin of the case and the details of the accusations

The case began after a filing by Vanina Vidal, interim head of the Criminal Section of the Legal Division of the Large Taxpayers Control Directorate of ARCA. The complaint detailed that AFA allegedly withheld taxes and social security contributions totaling $19,353,545,843.85 without depositing them once the legal deadline of thirty consecutive days had expired.

The items under investigation include withholdings of VAT, income tax, and social security contributions corresponding to the period between March 2024 and September of this year.

Regarding social security resources, the complaint invokes Article 7 of the Criminal Tax Regime, which defines simple tax evasion and provides for prison sentences of between two and six years when the amount evaded exceeds $80,000 per month, a threshold that is far exceeded in this case.

Transparency, oversight, and the end of privileges

The investigation is taking place in a context of growing public scrutiny of AFA's institutional situation and the management of its resources. In recent months, the entity has come under judicial scrutiny in various cases related to its financial statements and its administrative practices.

The lifting of tax and stock market secrecy marks a turning point: the justice system is moving forward without exceptions or privileges against one of the most powerful structures in Argentine sports. The case reinforces the message that tax and social security compliance is not optional, even for organizations that have historically been far removed from effective state oversight.