He didn’t hold back. This Monday a firm press statement was released, signed on behalf of the former world champion, outlining the sequence of events that brought the Spanish tax authority into a long, public dispute. The matter centers on a high-profile rider who claimed a Swiss tax residency and a lifestyle designed for focus, training, and family balance. Retired since 2019, he defended his position in court, ultimately securing a favorable outcome for the years in question, yet acknowledging the personal and professional cost exacted by the controversy. The pursuit of clarity about finances and residence had shadowed him for years, coloring the public’s perception even while his performance on the track remained a separate, ongoing story during his active days.
This note, delivered in a detailed and pointed voice, challenges what the writer describes as a biased interpretation of his tax situation, insisting that the case involved legitimate residency choices and compliant arrangements under Swiss law. The rider explains that Lugano, a compact yet modern Swiss city, offered the needed tranquility and proximity to training facilities—crucial for an athlete who traveled extensively. The decision to base himself there was not about evading tax but about stability, efficiency, and a tax regime deemed fairer than in many other jurisdictions.
In 2017, the Spanish Treasury opened an inquiry into his Swiss residency status, covering a span from 2013 through 2016. Although Swiss authorities maintained that the arrangements were lawful, the Spanish authorities persisted in their scrutiny, repeatedly requesting information from sponsors and teams. The process was described as relentless, casting a shadow over the public narrative and, some would say, injuring the reputation of the rider in the court of public opinion. Allegedly, ambassadors were involved in attempts to secure documents, and moments before races began, the rider faced obstacles that disrupted his routine. He contends that he advanced substantial sums to satisfy demands to avoid embargos and public humiliation, a sequence he characterizes as unfair and invasive.
Over the next several years, the rider faced a pressure that extended beyond legal arguments. He emphasizes the toll of the ordeal on his mental and emotional health, noting that the ongoing scrutiny felt like a personal attack even as professional racing continued around him. He stresses that, despite efforts to stay focused on competition, the strain took its own toll on performance and morale. In mid-2021 he stepped away from racing, seeking a measure of relief and a new outlook after a lengthy period of uncertainty. A regional court later issued decisions supporting his position for certain years, acknowledging that the deals challenged by the authorities had been handled properly and that some funds had to be refunded. Yet the rider laments that, despite judicial vindication, there has been no compensation or public apology that would repair the damage done to his reputation and peace of mind.
The rider reiterates a sense of exhaustion from the ongoing dispute and sadness at the toll it has taken. He notes that the pursuit of tax consistency and the proper administration of public funds should be a straightforward matter, but the episode grew into a public saga that affected his daily life and focus. He asserts that taxes are a factor of life no matter where a person lives, but emphasizes that the process should be fair and measured, not a campaign of harassment. The long legal path, he says, must conclude with fairness, clarity, and the restoration of personal peace that competitive athletes rely on to perform at their best.
In a recent public message that echoed across social channels, he reaffirmed his belief in due process and legal outcomes. He expressed a hope that the nightmare would end with a proper resolution, underscoring that the aim of taxation is accountability and governance, not punitive spectacle. The rider remains convinced that a clear, lawful framework should guide both residency decisions and tax obligations, and he hopes that the authorities will recognize the need for balance between enforcement and the rights of individuals who choose to base their careers where they find optimal conditions for training, life, and family.
He closes with a candid reflection: taxes must be paid where one lives, and when that principle is applied without bias, it serves the public interest. Yet the episode he endured illustrates the risk of a tax dispute escalating into personal turmoil. The rider looks toward a future where legal processes deliver closure, accountability, and a restored sense of calm—so that the focus can return to what he loves most: competing with dedication and integrity on the track.