After partisan agreements reached due to the fact that there are disagreements that hindered its approval, the Chamber of Deputies declared this Wednesday of urgency and favorably sanctioned, in first reading, the Electronic Invoicing billa piece that has been the subject of questioning.
The declaration of urgency was approved with 111 votes in favor and five abstentions, from the favorable report of the Permanent Finance Commission, with 106 votes in favor and eight abstentions and in first reading, it obtained 114 “yes” and six deputies they did not vote.
Likewise, the initiative was once again sent to the Permanent Finance Commission in a second reading, complying with the agreement between the three main political parties represented in the Lower House, the Modern Revolutionary (PRM), the Dominican Liberation (PLD) and of the People’s Force (FP).
When presenting this last procedure, Alfredo Pacheco, president of the Lower House, said that the piece was sent for study again so that this commission can render a new report to the plenary session “in the regulatory time.” According to the regulations, the commissions must submit their reports one month after being seized of an initiative.
The initiative, deposited by the Executive Branch on September 13, 2022, was approved in the Senate on January 10 of the current year.
When starting to get acquainted with bill of Electronic billingthe deputy of the People’s Force, Tobias Crespo, He said that he was in agreement with the piece being approved in the first reading with the objective that in a second reading it would be forwarded to the commission to be allowed the opportunity to submit 21 observations on the piece.
The congressman clarified that, in a general sense, he agreed with the piece due to its relevance but that he wanted some suggestions to be taken into account to prevent small and medium-sized companies from being affected by the entry into force of this law, if approved .
as long as Juan Julio Camposspokesman for the block of deputies of the PLD, said that he favored the bill of Electronic billing was forwarded to commission to deepen its study.
About, Julito Fulcar, spokesman for the PRM bloc, said he agreed with deputy Campos.
In view of the fact that the PRM did not have the necessary votes to achieve the declaration of urgency, as admitted by Alfredo Pacheco, president of the Lower House, he proposed before the plenary session the partisan agreement to declare it urgent and that in a second reading was sent to commission again.
He warned about the importance of the agreements reached being fulfilled.
The initiative
He bill of Electronic billing seeks to regulate the mandatory use of the electronic invoice in the country; set up the tax system electronic billing and its characteristics, as well as the results of optimization and contingencies, and establish the entry deadlines and tax facilities that would be granted to taxpayers who avail themselves of this system.
The favorable report of the Permanent Finance Commission was signed by six of its 14 members, therefore it did not achieve the number of signatures required for its validity, which on this occasion had to be at least eight headings of the deputies members.
The document was signed by the perremeistas José Francisco (Bertico) Santana, president of the commission, and César Santiago Rutinel Domínguez, Gerardo A. Concepción and Manuel Miguel Floría Terrero, the reformist Rafaela Alburquerque and the perredeista Héctor Dario Féliz Féliz.
They did not stamp their signature deputies Peledeistas Félix Antonio Castillo, Jesús Martínez Alberty, Lupe Núñez Rosario and Radhamés Camacho Cuevas, Perremeistas Francisco Javier Paulino, Dorina Yayaira Rodríguez Salazar and Sergio Moya de la Cruz and the member of the People’s Force, Enriqueta Rojas Javier.
Suggestions
The deputy of the Fuerza del Pueblo, Tobías Crespo, affirmed that it is necessary to take into account the existing digital gap and that the accreditation process of certification entities for the digital signature must be opened and made more flexible.
Also, in the 21 observations that he will present, he argues that the piece in some articles would be entering into competition with the roles of the Superintendencies of Banks and Securities and questions whether banking secrecy and the Habeas Data law would be complied with.
In addition, he believes that there are articles that could compete with the roles of the Ministry of Industry and Commerce (MICM), the National Institute for the Protection of Consumer Rights (Proconsumidor) and the General Directorate of Public Contracts (DGCP).
