WILLEMSTAD – A previously issued letter from Curaçao's Tax Collector, Alfonso Trona, reveals that the government was warned about potential revenue losses and public dissatisfaction before being asked to approve a sweeping cleanup of outstanding tax assessments dating from 2017 and earlier.
The letter, dated January 20, 2023, was addressed to then-Finance Minister Javier Silvania and has now been circulated publicly by the former minister as part of an ongoing dispute over responsibility for the government's tax collection policies.
Javier Silvania
The document provides insight into the financial and administrative considerations behind a proposal that could have reduced the outstanding tax collection portfolio by more than half.
Although the proposal was intended to make tax collection more effective, Trona explicitly acknowledged that the government could lose revenue from older assessments and that taxpayers who had consistently paid their taxes might consider the measure unfair.
Billions in Outstanding Assessments Overwhelmed Collection Capacity
According to the letter, Curaçao's tax administration was struggling with an enormous volume of outstanding assessments.
An earlier cleanup approach was expected to reduce the portfolio from approximately 5.5 billion Netherlands Antillean guilders to approximately 4.2 billion.
Even after that reduction, Trona questioned whether the remaining portfolio would be manageable.
The Tax Collector's Office faced administrative backlogs, including large numbers of objections and appeals involving older tax assessments.
Trona explained that intensive collection efforts involving older assessments were generating additional objections, increasing the workload of the tax administration.
At the same time, the collection portfolio had become too large for the available number of collection officers to manage effectively.
His proposed solution was to remove assessments relating to tax year 2017 and earlier from active collection through a one-time administrative cleanup.
The objective was to free up resources for collecting newer tax obligations.
Older Tax Debts Had Still Generated 135 Million Guilders
One of the most significant disclosures in the letter concerns the revenue generated by older assessments.
Trona acknowledged that approximately 135 million Netherlands Antillean guilders had been collected during 2022 from assessments relating to tax year 2017 and earlier.
This demonstrated that at least some of the older debts remained collectible.
The proposed cleanup therefore involved a financial trade-off.
By discontinuing active collection of older assessments, the government could potentially lose future revenue from taxpayers who might otherwise have paid.
Trona also noted that not every taxpayer with older outstanding assessments had newer tax debts.
Consequently, the government could not assume that the revenue lost from older assessments would automatically be replaced through the collection of more recent obligations.
Despite these risks, Trona maintained that focusing administrative resources on newer assessments could improve overall collection effectiveness.
The argument was that newer assessments generally have a higher probability of collection and that pursuing them would produce better results than maintaining an excessively large portfolio of older debts.
Taxpayers Who Paid on Time Could View Measure as Unfair
The letter also raised concerns about fairness.
Trona warned that taxpayers who had consistently complied with their tax obligations might react negatively to another cleanup benefiting individuals who had failed to pay.
The concern was particularly relevant because the government had previously introduced a tax relief arrangement.
A new measure allowing older assessments to be removed from active collection could create the perception that taxpayers who delayed payment were receiving more favorable treatment than those who fulfilled their obligations.
This issue goes beyond administrative efficiency.
Tax compliance depends partly on public confidence that the system treats taxpayers fairly.
If residents and businesses believe that unpaid obligations will eventually be removed from collection, the incentive to comply voluntarily could be weakened.
The letter acknowledged this risk but presented the cleanup as a necessary measure to improve the effectiveness of the tax administration.
Focus Would Shift to Assessments From 2018 Onward
To address the potential financial risks, Trona recommended that the Tax Collector's Office make full use of its collection powers for assessments relating to 2018 and later.
He also proposed stricter monitoring of current tax obligations, particularly among business taxpayers.
The intention was to ensure that taxpayers continued meeting their ongoing obligations and that immediate action would be taken when noncompliance was identified.
Trona emphasized that using the tax year as the basis for the cleanup would be a one-time measure.
Afterward, the Tax Collector's Office would conduct quarterly reviews based on the dates of assessments and additional administrative criteria.
This approach was intended to prevent the collection portfolio from accumulating another large backlog.
The letter also proposed clearing small outstanding balances, addressing certain COVID-19-related assessments and applying limited tax credits to qualifying assessments.
Together, these measures were expected to reduce the administrative workload and allow collection officers to concentrate on accounts with stronger collection prospects.
What Does Removing Assessments From Collection Actually Mean?
An important distinction in the controversy concerns the difference between removing an assessment from active collection and legally forgiving a tax debt.
The January 2023 letter repeatedly refers to cleaning up the collection portfolio and placing certain assessments outside active collection.
Those administrative terms do not necessarily establish that the underlying legal obligations were extinguished.
Whether a taxpayer's debt was formally canceled, written off for accounting purposes, or simply no longer pursued depends on the legal authority and procedures applied.
The letter alone does not resolve that distinction.
It also does not establish whether the government eventually implemented every proposed measure or whether additional legal and administrative requirements were imposed.
Those details are essential for determining the financial consequences of the policy and whether it was implemented lawfully.
Public Debate Now Focuses on Who Made the Decisions
Former Finance Minister Javier Silvania has used the letter to challenge statements and allegations concerning his responsibility for the cleanup of older tax assessments.
In a social media post accompanying the document, Silvania emphasized that the recommendation came from Trona himself and carried the Tax Collector's signature.
He also stated that the letter had previously been submitted to Curaçao Parliament.
The document confirms that Trona formally recommended the measures and requested ministerial approval.
However, the recommendation does not eliminate the political responsibility associated with approving government policy, nor does ministerial approval automatically remove the administrative responsibilities of officials implementing it.
The relevant question is how those responsibilities were divided in practice.
A complete assessment would require the original Council of Ministers decision from August 24, 2022, the additional criteria outlined in Trona's December 6, 2022 letter, the minister's response to the January 2023 proposal and records showing how the measures were executed.
These documents would help establish whether the final policy followed Trona's recommendation and whether the implementation remained within the applicable legal framework.
Transparency Needed Over Financial Impact
The newly publicized letter provides a clearer picture of the reasoning behind the proposed cleanup.
It shows that the tax administration faced serious capacity problems, that a major reduction of the outstanding portfolio was considered necessary and that the potential financial and fairness risks were acknowledged in advance.
However, several questions remain unanswered.
How much of the outstanding portfolio was ultimately removed from active collection? How much of that amount was considered realistically collectible? What revenue was subsequently generated from newer assessments? And did the cleanup actually improve collection performance?
The answers are necessary to determine whether the policy achieved its intended objectives.
For Curaçao's taxpayers, the central issue is not simply whether the recommendation originated with Trona or was approved by Silvania.
It is whether a decision involving billions in outstanding tax assessments was legally justified, consistently implemented and financially beneficial to the country.
The January 2023 letter provides an important part of that history, but the full picture depends on the decisions and results that followed.