Scholz and the cum-ex affair: the chancellor's bad memory

When it comes to his Hamburg past, the chancellor smiles.

At his summer press conference, he was asked what he knew about the money that investigators found in the safe deposit box of his Hanseatic party friend Johannes Kahrs - "Nothing," says Olaf Scholz.

Point.

This is not surprising.

But it is at least a clear answer.

Better than missing the memory of crucial meetings in the cum-ex affair.

The affair has been occupying Hamburg politics for a good two and a half years, and Scholz has followed the shadows of his past to the chancellery.

A committee of inquiry is trying to clarify the question of whether there was political influence on the tax administration's decision to refrain from recovering 47 million euros from the Warburg Bank, which was involved in cum-ex transactions, at the end of 2016.

Another 43 million euros were only reclaimed in 2017 when the Federal Ministry of Finance intervened.

The allegations are "horrible tales"

Until March 2018, Scholz was first mayor in Hamburg, Peter Tschentscher, his successor, was finance senator, and Kahrs was a notorious Hamburg budget politician in Berlin.

On Friday, Scholz will testify again before the investigative committee in Hamburg, the tension is great.

However, it is doubtful that he will remember more than his first statement.

At the time, he described the allegations as a "horror tale."

Kahrs left politics in 2020, he is silent on the affair.

Scholz and Tschentscher have denied any influence.

There is nothing that could prove the opposite.

Scholz referred to this in his summer press conference: there had been so many hearings, so many files were searched, and all of this had only one result: there was no political influence.

He is certain that this assessment will not change.

But even if evidence is missing after all this investigative work, there are strange-looking details.

In all likelihood, the committee of inquiry will not seriously distress Scholz or even endanger his chancellorship.

A bland aftertaste could remain.

Just because of the memory gaps.

Because what exactly happened in the decisive days in autumn 2016 and why, will probably never be fully reconstructed from files and statements alone.

Also because not everything that contributes to decisions always has to be said out loud or even written down.

In 2016, the Warburg Bank feared for its existence if the tax authorities demanded the money back.

The head of the bank sought a conversation with Scholz, and a meeting took place.

This became known because the banker Christian Olearius noted it in his diaries, which were secured during investigations.

Scholz confirmed meetings, but does not want to be able to remember the details.

That seems astonishing for a bank in distress that is so important for the city.

Even if you consider how Scholz otherwise presents himself as a strong leader who always has everything in view.

"Devil's Plan"

According to the diary, Olearius forwarded a document from the bank containing arguments against a recovery to the finance senator – after Scholz called him and said he should send it there without further comment.

The bank did not consider the tax situation to have been determined.

Tschentscher noted on the document that he wanted to be informed about the situation and passed it on to the tax authorities.

A few days later, the refund was off the table.

Tschentscher emphasized in the committee that there had been no political influence.

Employees of the financial administration expressed themselves accordingly.

The line stands.

Nevertheless, even with new details, a bland aftertaste remains.

For example, in the private chat message from a central tax officer shortly after the waiver of claims, in which she is said to have written about the "diabolical plan" that worked.

And then there are the 200,000 euros that investigators discovered in a Kahrs safe deposit box.

The money was not confiscated because there is no evidence that it came from a criminal offense.

It is the presumption of innocence.

The search was initiated by the Cologne public prosecutor's office because they were investigating Kahrs and a former SPD interior senator for encouraging tax evasion in connection with Warburg's cum-ex transactions.

In these investigations lies the great unknown for the chancellor - and the Hamburg SPD.

Will the once powerful string puller Kahrs testify at some point?

And does he possibly have something to say that will make even the chancellor stop smiling?