Half Of The SAT Officials Reported To MP Are From Customs

Of the 88 officials of the Tax Administration Service (SAT) who have been reported to the Public Ministry (MP), more than half worked in the General Administration of Customs, according to the data for the third quarter of this year of the Report of Debt and Public Finance of the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit (SHCP).

The data showed that a total of 48 Customs workers were reported to the MP for various crimes. Among them, six were for crimes comparable to smuggling in the North Pacific, Northeast and North Central regions, while five were for crimes comparable to smuggling and the illicit exercise of public service in the Western region.

Other crimes for which the customs personnel were reported to the MP were for the illicit use of attributions and powers; smuggling; concussion; bribery; Documents forgery; crimes against the administration of justice and committed by public servants; Stole; crimes against the administration of justice and committed by public servants; and administrative responsibility.

Other administrations with officials reported to the MP are the General Taxpayer Services Administration, with 22; General Administration of Federal Fiscal Audit, with seven; the General Administration of Communications and Information Technologies, with five; the General Administration of Collection, with three; and the General Administration of Resources and Services, with three.

Among the crimes identified in these areas are the falsification of public documents; illicit access to computer systems and equipment; fraud; illicit access to computer systems and equipment; crimes in electoral matters; illicit exercise of public service; improper modification to systems; and crimes of administrative responsibility.

On the other hand, 563 were presented before the Internal Control Body (OIC) of the SAT for administrative responsibility of government workers.

The OIC is in charge of dealing with complaints or denunciations of public servants made by users of the institution, in addition to applying internal rules and mechanisms that prevent acts or omissions that could constitute administrative misconduct.