Ex-justice chief Sagardía provides his version of tax filing dispute.

Former Puerto Rico Justice Secretary Antonio Sagardía de Jesús (Screenshot via Telenoticias PR)

By THE STAR STAFF

Former Puerto Rico Justice Secretary Antonio Sagardía de Jesús said Wednesday that he did not serve as legal counsel for former Housing Secretary Ciary Pérez Peña amid public scrutiny over alleged irregularities at an inspection center she owned, Yabucoa Auto Services.

Sagardía said he provided only a consultation at Pérez Peña’s request and that she never retained him.

He added that, at the time, he had no contractual relationship with the Department of Housing and therefore faced no conflict in discussing the matter.

“Ciary Pérez Peña never hired me,” Sagardía said on the television program “Puestos Pa’ La Mañana,” adding that even if she had retained other attorneys, he would have been able to speak with her because he was not a Housing Department contractor.

Tax filings dispute

Sagardía also addressed a separate controversy involving his tax records after the island Treasury Department declined to provide his tax information to the Senate in response to a request from Senate President Thomas Rivera Schatz. Sagardía said the disputed “information returns” were not requested at the outset and insisted he never refused to provide tax documentation, adding that he deferred to the Treasury secretary’s position on institutional policy and was not authorized to disclose information protected by attorney confidentiality.

After the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeals issued rulings favoring the Senate and ordering Sagardía to make his tax information public, Rivera Schatz criticized what he described as the late filing of information returns.

“Tax returns are sacred to a taxpayer, and as secretary of justice, I know the law and I know there is a procedure for requesting documentation,” Sagardía said, adding that he took responsibility for how the matter unfolded.

He said he chose Puerto Rico’s optional income tax method, under which taxpayers pay based on gross income without claiming deductions. Sagardía said his accountants believed an informational return was not required under that approach, but he acknowledged the filing was an error and said he submitted the return on March 24 through the SURI system and paid the administrative penalty imposed.

Subcontracting questions

Responding to allegations that his law firm failed to withhold taxes from subcontracted entities -- while the firms later filed their own taxes for services rendered -- Sagardía said he was advised those firms were taxpayers and that he did not benefit from the arrangement.

“There was no tax benefit for me; on the contrary, it cost me the penalty,” he said.

Sagardía, who is now a government contractor, said he coordinated contracts with outside law firms that later provided services, and that agencies with which he held contracts authorized the subcontracts.

“Since I couldn’t invoice, they [the outside firms] sent me their hours, and I prepared the invoices,” he said.