Payment, Not Guilt: What Does the Kühn Transfer Mean for Mallorca's Justice?

Payment, not guilt: What does the Kühn transfer mean for Mallorca's justice?

Key question: Does this multi-million transfer clarify the allegations — or merely shift the problem?

This week a payment of just under €14 million to the Spanish Tax Agency (Agencia Tributaria) was accepted by the competent court. The funds apparently flowed via the company Birdie Son Vida; their origin was a compensation paid in 2024 to the company in connection with a construction project in Sóller, as covered in the trial of Matthias Kühn in Palma. Formally: payment without admission of criminal liability. But what does this really say about the progress of the proceedings?

In front of the building on Via Alemania, where judges sit, a February morning shows the usual bustle: lawyers in dark coats, a pair of tourists with a camera, the echo of rolling suitcases on the cobbles. Such scenes make the abstract sums suddenly tangible — €14 million is not a theoretical line item, it means released account balances, executed transfers, but not automatically calm in the case.

Authorities have already seized more than €30 million from that compensation sum as a security measure. The recent settlement of the original amount allows part of the frozen funds to be released. At the same time, a dispute over a further roughly €9 million remains unresolved. Who prevails here decides not only about figures, but about how far claims for recourse and criminal liability can be pursued within the web of companies and Spanish insolvency law.

Investigators see a pattern: in their view assets were shifted between companies during the years of crisis until tax claims became hard to enforce. Defense lawyers counter that some claims arose in the course of ongoing insolvency administrations or were secured with collateral, and that the rights in question could have been offered to the authorities — an offer which, according to the defense, was not preceded by any application to assume them before a final decision was reached.

Important to note: the payment does not relieve criminal liability. Investigations continue; final interviews are still pending, including with a family member and other participants whose testimony could complete the picture. At the same time, courts must decide on several appeals against previously set bail amounts. For residents and business owners in Palma it feels like déjà vu: proceedings drag on, money moves between accounts, and the answer for the public coffers remains unclear.

What is often lacking in the public debate is transparency around the compensation agreement from which the funds originated. When public authorities make payments to companies, the conditions should be openly and clearly documented. It is also not yet clear how insolvency administrators communicate their decisions and what control mechanisms exist when assets are reallocated shortly before state intervention. Without such information, central questions remain open: were third-party interests privileged? Were there communication gaps between the administration and the tax authorities?

Concrete solutions are obvious: a binding register for state compensation payments with easily accessible records, mandatory reviews for large transfers during insolvency proceedings, and closer cooperation between financial auditors and public prosecutors could help close gaps. Procedures against insolvency administrators should also be more transparent; independent checks would be sensible whenever there are grounds to suspect possible collusion.

For the people who have coffee at Plaça de Cort or Passeig Mallorca this means: it is not enough that sums are shuffled around and, in the end, statements about "no admission of guilt" are issued. It is about traceability and about the state being able to assert its rights without being hampered by bureaucratic or corporate constructions. Only then is the feeling justified that the courts are not just after large sums, but also reclaiming legal clarity.

Conclusion: the payment of roughly €14 million soothes account balances, but not the questions. The still disputed €9 million and the remaining investigations are decisive for assessing the events. Anyone who wants calm in Mallorca’s legal machinery should push for faster, more transparent procedures and clearer rules on state compensation and insolvency transfers.

What happens next: Investigations will continue, further hearings are scheduled, and courts are reviewing appeals. And outside the court you can watch the small drama of large sums unfold — a taxi stopping at the zebra crossing, a lawyer on the phone, and a citizen folding a newspaper, wondering why such cases take so long.