In a new report, experts appointed by the Bank of Spain to investigate the resolution of Banco Popular reiterate that it is not possible to object to the bank’s accounts for 2015 and 2016 as it is not possible to transfer the results. Oversight of those years with a retrospective character.
After taking his deposition on two occasions, the Judge of the National Court, José Luis Calama, requested a new elaboration of the report from judicial experts Teodoro Fernández and Álvaro López, whose dossiers were very critical of the bank’s situation. The most delicate aspect was to clarify whether Popular should have declared a loss of over 1,000 million and not a profit of over 100 million. Furthermore, the technician could not explain some of the issues raised by the prosecutor’s office, such as the actual impact of certain magnitudes on the defunct entity’s accounts, and admitted that they did not take into account part of the documentation provided by PwC. It was on this last point that the magistrate urged them to do a “simulation” exercise taking into account the PwC valuations.
In a document now submitted to the judge, the technicians reiterate that the bank used “non-acceptable valuations”, although “it is not possible to estimate valuation losses, which does not mean they were not overvalued”. From an accounting perspective, this simulation does not have regulatory support and, therefore, there is no need for corrections to the annual profit and loss account, he says, so it is not possible, “from an accounting perspective”, to ensure that the analysis The shortfall in provisions for the years made is the result of the above valuations. Nor did they provide the individual accounting sequence of each asset, the document continues, so it could not be determined whether there was an improper increase in its book value and if that led to the release of provisions.
The head of the Central Court of Directive No. 4, José Luis Calama, has been investigating Popular’s previous two management teams since 2017, led by Angel Ron and his successor Emilio Saracho, for alleged corporate crimes. The judge then opened two separate pieces, one investigating Ron’s team for a 2016 capital increase, and the other on Saracho’s 108-day tenure, which was laced with false news to dilute the value of the stock. Focuses on the potential offense of market manipulation.
Likewise, the head of the Central Court of Instruction No. 5, Santiago Pedraz, is investigating a capital increase made by the bank in 2012, which resulted in the presentation of two complaints directed against the then managers of the entity.
follow all the information of economy And Business In Facebook And Twitteror in our weekly newspaper
five day agenda
Most important economic appointments of the day, with keys and context to understand their scope.
get it in your mail