Because of his lack of emotion, the Chancellor was often mocked as “Scholzomat”, but Olaf Scholz has a sore point: Cum-Ex. The fact that he is still being asked about his role in the Hamburg tax scandal annoys him. A journalist now feels this directly.
Olaf Scholz has years of experience dealing with capital journalists. He was a guest at the federal press conference 33 times, and 23 visits were during his time as federal finance minister. Now he is answering journalists’ questions for the first time as chancellor. And he starts seriously. After all, the times are too. War in Ukraine, energy crisis, inflation – Scholz had so many problems at the beginning of his chancellorship that hardly anyone talked about the actual traffic light projects. The chancellor therefore obviously feels compelled to remind people of the minimum wage, for example, which will rise to 12 euros from October. Or the increased disability pension.
Nevertheless, Scholz obviously does not intend to just unwind his agenda. When a journalist pointed out that it had taken 30 minutes before Europe was discussed for the first time, the chancellor replied that it was up to the journalists to address the issues he was to speak about at the press conference. Of course he has a point there. But he doesn’t stay that humble. When asked about his role in the cum-ex scandal surrounding Warburg Bank, he reacts in monosyllables. “What do you know about Johannes Kahrs’ locker?” asks a journalist. “Nothing,” replies Scholz. What he thinks, where the money comes from. “No idea.”
The chancellor leaves no doubt that he is not comfortable with the questions on the subject. For two and a half years now, he has been haunted by the question of whether, when he was mayor of Hamburg, he was partly responsible for the fact that millions of euros in taxes evaded were initially not reclaimed from the Warburg Bank. Kahrs was considered his confidant at the time. In the meantime, the former SPD MP is being investigated for favoritism and aiding and abetting tax evasion. At the request of Warburg boss Christian Olearius, Kahrs is said to have used his political influence to spare the bank a tax refund. The question is whether he also used Scholz for this.
In front of the press, the chancellor says that he spent many hours commenting on this matter, and he repeats it several times – referring to his statements in the committee of inquiry. “An incredible number of people have been heard and an incredible number of files have been studied,” said Scholz. The result was always that there was no knowledge of political influence. The capital’s press must also accept that. But the Basta announcement does not work.
A journalist wants to know when he last saw Kahrs. That was a long time ago, says Scholz. Couldn’t he ask Kahrs to disclose where the 200,000 euros in his safe deposit box came from? “I’m as curious as you are,” the chancellor replies, “but he probably won’t give me or you any information.” The Chancellor reacted harshly to the claim that Olearius was allowed to keep the evaded millions thanks to Scholz’s intervention. “You may rest assured that I am not one of those people who would do this: but you would not be able to corroborate this factual statement if you had to.” What is meant is nothing more than a court process.
Scholz reveals how much the reporting attacks him personally – and how much he would like to see it ended. For the Cologne CDU member of the Bundestag Serap Güler, this is absurd. “A Chancellor who threatens a journalist with a lawsuit if he does what Scholz himself refuses: educate about Cum-Ex, report. Wow. If a Chancellor of the FRG allows himself that, freedom of the press is at the limit,” she tweeted . From a legal point of view, too, the topic is far from off the table. As early as August 19, Scholz had to testify again before the Hamburg investigative committee.
Only a few days ago it became known that the Cologne public prosecutor’s office had Scholz’ official e-mail inbox from the time as Hamburg mayor searched in addition to e-mails from the tax authorities. Checking off the scandal arbitrarily and ironing out questions about it is unlikely to result in less being reported – regardless of the question of guilt. The cum-ex scandal remains Scholz’s Achilles’ heel and a topic where even the veteran shows nerves. “Being contrite,” Scholz admits, “is definitely something I’m capable of, even if there are claims to the contrary.”
