Colombian singer Shakira Mebarak presented her defense in court on Friday, asserting that the 90 euros paid to the Spanish treasury covered tax obligations totaling 104 million euros worldwide. The artist faced accusations of tax fraud totaling 14.5 million euros and faced the prospect of an eight-year prison term. The defense contends that the duration of the case did not extend beyond 183 days in the reference year, and that paying taxes in Spain is a necessity driven by the country’s fiscal rules and the singer’s international obligations.
Attorney Pau Molins Amat, representing Shakira, argued that she has always acted as a taxpayer with transparent tax conduct and has relied on top-tier advisors, including PricewaterhouseCoopers, from the outset. He emphasized that credible evidence supporting the charges had not been presented. He described the singer as having faced aggressive scrutiny in both legal and media arenas, suggesting that unconventional methods were used to tarnish her reputation and compel a settlement. The defense notes that Shakira has paid the claimed liability plus interest exceeding 17 million euros to the treasury.
In her defense, Shakira asserted that she declared her tax status in Spain with complete transparency and good faith, citing her consistent public record and continuous dedication to fulfilling her obligations. She highlighted that her eldest son’s schooling at the end of 2014 coincided with periods of full compliance and that she was physically present in Spain for no more than 60 days in the years cited. In later years, she accepted a role with NBC as a judge on The Voice, which required her presence in the United States while managing her family commitments. She characterized these facts as public and well-documented through numerous photographs and video material.
The defense characterized her presence in Spain as occasional, noting that it related to visits to a recently separated partner, football star Gerard Piqué. It was stated that, during initial stages, there was no binding residence in Spain due to the couple’s personal circumstances, and visits occurred mainly during vacation periods or short trips to Barcelona or other locations.
2% of income in Spain
The case also considered whether Shakira’s personal and professional center in Spain could establish tax residency there. The defense argued that she represented only a small portion of her worldwide income, with the singer’s main economic activity centered in the United States. According to the defense, these factors undermine the prosecutors’ theory of Spanish residency and suggest a misallocation of public resources toward a case lacking substantial corroboration.
Shakira asserted that her rights to privacy and the presumption of innocence were violated. She claimed that the treasury resorted to intrusive methods, including requests for private data from healthcare providers where she sought appointments. The defense noted that some records show payments made with various credit cards, pointing to the global nature of her finances and the reality that payments might occur in multiple jurisdictions without her continuous physical presence in any single country. The defense argued that this global financial choreography should be weighed against the allegations, particularly when many transactions occur concurrently in different parts of the world.
The defense further contends that the tax authority’s audit relied on inconsistent dates and factual statements. For the trial, prosecutors summoned numerous witnesses, ranging from neighbors who lived near Shakira and Piqué to individuals who had met her at various times, underscoring the broader public nature of the case. The singer herself has maintained that these testimonies only reinforce the broader narrative documented in public records and media coverage (as noted in court materials and associated press coverage).