Employee-free firm billed €3.7M and bought Porsche

Shell company with zero staff billed €3.7M and bought Porsche

A business without a single employee on payroll, equipped only with a computer and a printer, invoiced €3.7 million over two years. Its balance sheet listed a Porsche Panamera worth approximately €125,000. The case, uncovered by Eldiario.es based on the Tax Agency report supporting the Prosecutor's complaint, points to Alberto González Amador, partner of Isabel Díaz Ayuso, president of the Community of Madrid. Published in March 2024, the news sparked a debate far beyond the individual: how does one bill such an amount without corporate structure? Is this an isolated incident or the tip of the iceberg?

Maxwell Cremona: two companies, zero workers, two luxury cars

The Treasury report describes Maxwell Cremona and Masterman & Whitaker as vehicles "without hired workers or barely any material means to channel their income." The former, the main entity, included the Porsche Panamera and later a Maserati with pending fines at the Madrid City Council among its assets. It also recorded €3,900 for curtains, a detail many saw as definitive proof of spending without regard for profitability.

The second company, Masterman & Whitaker, is classified by the Treasury as "a mere shell company," lacking workers or resources despite contracting with giants like Quirón Salud. According to sources, it was González's "main client." The Prosecutor's Office maintains that the luxury car company claimed 15 invoices worth €1.7 million for services allegedly not provided by suppliers, used to improperly deduct expenses. González himself admitted in writing on February 2, 2024, to committing two tax offenses and proposed a fine and sentence.

Is billing €3.7M without employees unusual?

It depends on the sector. A trader reselling electronics or commodities can move millions with just a phone and a computer. Margins, however, are usually thin. Defenders argue that billing differs from earning, and €3.7 million might yield modest profit. Conversely, the Tax Agency report doesn't dispute volume but the lack of economic substance: no employees, no real suppliers, and invoices deemed false by prosecutors. The issue isn't whether high billing is possible without staff, but whether these specific invoices corresponded to real services.

The partner's narrative vs. the case facts

The discussion quickly turned political. Some claim the case is exaggerated due to the sentimental link with Ayuso, viewing media attention as a wear-and-tear operation. Others argue the link is precisely what matters: if a regional president's partner bills clients who contract with public administration, conflict of interest is inevitable. Between extremes, skeptics point to a pattern: cases covering each other up depending on party convenience, with corruption as currency.

The economic lesson nobody wants to hear

Beyond the noise, the case raises an uncomfortable question for economic policy: how many companies without employees or means operate with public contracts or major private clients? The answer isn't in the report, but the pattern—high billing, low declaration, buying cars under the company name—is known. While debating severity, the enabling structure remains intact. If prosecutors maintain charges and courts proceed, we'll see if this ends in a fine or escalates. Given precedents, betting on the former isn't cynicism; it's statistics.