Il saggio si incentra sulla legge belga che disciplina la motivazione degli atti amministrativi del 29 luglio 1991 e, in particolare, sulle possibilità della sua applicazione nei procedimenti tributari. In questo contesto, il tema si sviluppa attraverso l’applicazione della motivazione ratione personaee ratione materiae. La motivazione deve essere esplicita ed adeguata al fine di soddisfare i requisiti imposti della legge sulla motivazione degli atti amministrativi; l’atto deve dunque contenere tutte le valutazioni giuridiche e fattuali poste alla base della decisione amministrativa. Giurisprudenza e dottrina evidenziano l’importanza della motivazione, in quanto un atto non motivato può anche condurre alla nullità della decisione amministrativa.

1. The Law on the Formal Motivation of Administrative Acts: Generalities 1.1. Introduction In the 1990s the Belgian legislator has realised that in the relationship citizen – administration, falling back to the unwritten and general principles of proper administration was not sufficient to protect citizens adequately against the possible arbitrary action of the administration. In the context of preventive legal protection, laws on the formal motivation of administrative acts [1], the public nature of the administration [2], and the Ombudsman [3] have been introduced. The purpose of this legislation is to incite the administration – the tax administration included – to a more careful decision-making process, to inform citizens better about the decision-making process and to facilitate the administrative and jurisdictional supervision of these decisions [4]. The present article focuses on the Law on the Formal Motivation of Ad­ministrative Acts of 29 July 1991, and in particular on the various application possibilities in tax cases. Before we go into the fiscal state of affairs, we describe the general significance of this law. 1.2. Significance of the Law on the Formal Motivation of Administrative Acts All (positive or negative) unilateral individual written legal acts by an ad­ministration that aim at legal consequences, must, since the coming into force of the Law on the Formal Motivation of Administrative Acts in 1991, be motivated explicitly. Purely preparatory acts, such as non-binding advices or proposals, but also implementation measures are, as a consequence, not subject to same. Independent of how broad the application domain seems to be, the legi­slator has foreseen four exceptions to the explicit motivation obligation. There is no explicit motivation obligation in case this motivation can endan­ger the external security of the State, can disturb public order, can detract from the respect for private life and can detract from the stipulations on the oath of secrecy. Urgent necessity does not release the administration from its obligation of explicitly motivating its acts. In case another law than the Law on the Motivation of Administrative Acts enforces a more stringent motivation obligation (for instance answer to all arguments), this more strin­gent law is to apply to the administration acts. The motivation has to mention in the act itself the legal and factual considerations, which are at the basis of the decision. The law requires the motivation to be adequate. This is a vague norm, which is assessed in concreto. It is required that the motivation be proportional to the importance of the decision and to the scope of the policy freedom of the administration (bound competence or otherwise). Nevertheless, the motivation is also con­sidered to be adequate, when the decision itself refers to other documents [continua..]