In September 2013 I published an article where I mentioned a judgment rendered by a Court in Albacete on the 8th of June 2012 and that was confirmed by the Provincial Court in the same year. In these proceedings forty-six homebuyers who purchased off-plan houses that were never built -but for which they had made several payments on account- sued the developer and the bank jointly, despite not having bank guarantees for the amounts paid.
As I mentioned in that article this judgment (a first at the time) ordered the bank to refund all the amounts paid by the buyers. It thereby established joint and several liability with the developer of the homes through an interpretation of articles 1 and 2 of Law 57/1968, of 27 July 1968 on the collection of advance payments in the construction and sale of homes.
This however was just an isolated judgment, which did not set precedent. In fact, in the two years since, there have been judgments both in favour and against banks.
These different interpretations have come to an end as, on 21 December 2015, due to the many contradictory judgments the Supreme Court rendered an appeal judgment on this matter. This judgment of the Spanish High Court unifies the criteria to prevent different interpretations by other courts. The Supreme Court is certain about the interpretation of these regulations and ruled in favour of individual homebuyers.
The High Court understands that the credit institutions where homebuyers deposit advance payments to purchase a home under construction, must respond to homebuyers. This refers to cases where the homes are not completed by the developer and the latter has no money or is insolvent, making it impossible for homebuyers to recover any money paid.
In the Fifth Legal Grounds, the last paragraph of the judgment, the Court states that the credit institution has the legal responsibility of a special duty of oversight over the developer to which it issues a loan for the construction of those homes, so that the deposits of homebuyers, especially individuals, are transferred to the special account that developers must open and the bank must require the developer to guarantee all the amounts it collects.
Credit institutions that grant loans to developers to build homes, have the legal obligation of opening a special and separate account, duly guaranteed, so that the amounts that buyers pay for the homes are deposited in that account. If the credit institution does not guarantee that buyers’ money is deposited in a special account, it will be held liable for the total amounts deposited by buyers in any type of account held by the developer at the entity.
In other words, if the bank has not ensured the protection of the buyers’ money, with this Judgment, there is no longer any legal doubt that the bank will be sentenced to refund, from its own “pocket”, the money paid by homebuyers in cases where the developer does not complete homes and it has no money or becomes insolvent.
In my humble opinion, it seems logical and consistent for the Supreme Court to have settled this matter in favour of homebuyers.
In banking practice, most developers building homes off-plan create a company aimed exclusively at building that development, with these companies usually being devoid of any assets.
From now own, I believe that these loans issued to developers will only be granted after reviewing the solvency and guarantees of the developers thoroughly and that branks will monitor the money that buyers pay for their homes.
In these situations, with this judgment by the Spanish High Court, buyers of homes that are not completed will have the necessary legal certainty to get, through a Judgment, banks to be ordered to refund their money, thereby having more options available to recover the money they lost.
It is very likely that, if this situation arises, now, with this judgment, the bank will choose to avoid legal proceedings and reach a settlement with buyers.
If you are a non-resident in Spain and own a property there, you are liable to Spanish Income Tax for Non-Residents payment (Spanish IRNR). This issue was already considered in former articles on our website in November 2010 and October 2013:
When a property is owned by a married couple or several persons, each of them becomes an independent taxpayer, so that they should file tax returns separately according to the ownership interest they have on this property.
Depending on the property final use, the income subject to tax payment may be distinguished between:
1.- INCOME FROM LEASED PROPERTY: when the property is leased, the income to be declared will be the whole amount received, excluding Spanish VAT.
2.- TAXABLE INCOME OF URBAN REAL PROPERTY FOR PERSONAL USE: asthis is the most common case, it will be deeply analyzed below:
The income to be declared is the amount resulting from the application of the following percentages to the property cadastral value:
Generally, 2 per 100.
In the event of property with a revised or modified cadastral value, 1.1 per 100 from the 1st of January 1994.
Once these percentages are applied, the final payable amount should be calculated for each of the owners pursuant to how long they have been owners of the property during the year.
Tax form 210 is used to pay this tax and it can be downloaded from the official web of the Spanish Tax Authority (A.E.A.T.), including the steps in English to fill it in. It is worthy mentioning that it is not easy to understand them.
Our office is currently dealing with the IRNR season 2012. The deadline to file this tax return expires on the 31st of December of this year. Although if you want to place the payment as a direct debit in your bank account the form must be filled before the 22nd of December. Thus, if you have owned a property in 2012, you should contact your tax advisor to fulfill this tax liability as soon as possible.
If you need our advice, we will be pleased to help you.
Author: Francisco Delgado Montilla, C&D Solicitors (lawyers)
Torrox-Costa (Malaga/Costa del Sol/Andalucia)
In recent years, during the course of our work, we have met many foreign customers interested in living in Andalusia Spain, preferably in coastal areas and having their own rural hotel, hostel or Bed & Breakfast (B&B). Many of these customers consider this option due to their attraction to Andalusian climate and culture, with the dream of changing their lives and enjoying life in an extremely charming country.
Taking over a business or starting up yourself?
The main option that customers interested in opening a B&B in Andalusiacontemplate is to buy a business already in operation, with fewer people seeking to buy property to build the business from the ground up.
If you look on the Internet, there are quite a few ads for the sale of rural hotels and B&B´s. Many of these ads offer the method of transferring a business that is already operating, along with the rental or sale of the property where the activity takes place.
During the transfer of the business, its assets, such as customer portfolio, fixed assets, provisions, etc. are valued. This serves the purpose of establishing a transfer price for the business, which must be paid by the new owner interested in continuing the operations.
What is a reasonable ´traspaso´ price for buying an existing B&B?
The valuation of the business (traspaso) is usually based on its income during recent years and on net profit, as well as the value of its fixed assets, i.e., all remodelling, improvements and provisions acquired for said business. Obviously, licences and legal permits required for engaging in such an activity are a key part of the transfer value.
In the transfer method, the rental of the property is usually established, most often with a lease option, or the property may be sold directly to the new owner. It seems more reasonable to choose rental with a lease option for the property during the first years of the business as if, for any reason, the business is not what was expected and the profits or workload are not worth the effort, we would lose the amount paid for the transfer but would not have to remain the owners of a property we acquired for a business we no longer wish to operate.
As you may infer, the operational cost of a B&B may be high enough to justify carrying out, prior to its purchase, a due diligence process about it for the purpose of determining whether the asking price (traspaso) is reasonable. I consider three lines of action very important in this regard:
VALUE OF THE BUSINESS.
You should hire an economist, expert, or tax consultant to study the accounting of the business during recent years, including all tax documentation, as well as the accounts submitted at the Commercial Register. With this report, an objective professional, knowledgeable on the matter, will take a snapshot of the financial situation of the business.
BUSINESS LICENCES.
In order to check whether the B&B you are seeking to purchase has all the necessary business licences, it is important for an architect to visit city hall and check whether the business is in order and complies with all the legal requirements for its operation. The architect will visit the property to verify that the infrastructure and installations are those legally required for this business and will issue a report of his or her findings.
PURCHASE OF THE BUSINESS.
Once you have decided to acquire the business, when preparing all the documentation for the transfer and rental/purchase of the property, it is important for an attorney to intervene so as to guarantee all the obligations of the parties, establish the payment method and protect the buyer from potential problems during its execution. If the property where the business will operate is located in a rural area, as is the case for many of these hotels, the intervention of an attorney is even more important, as these areas are subject to a series of legal limitations that must be reviewed.
Professional advice for your investment will pay back
It is obvious that this complete due diligence process for the B&B makes buying the business more expensive as you may spend a significant amount of money on these professionals and you may end up not buying the business. However, you must consider that spending thousands and thousands of euros, often from your savings or a bank loan, on something, before verifying its value, can lead to a very difficult financial and personal situation.
It is also a good idea to get informed about tourism in that area and expectations for the future. There are statistical data about the occupancy rates for rural accommodation that may help you. For instance, the Institute of National Statistics (INE) periodically publishes detailed occupancy surveys for rural tourism and any other type of accommodation and all this information, in detail and broken down by regions, can be accessed from its website.
New business changes after recession in Andalusia
For instance, on the 1 September, www.escapadarural.com published that rural tourism in Andalusia reached an occupancy rate of 36% in July and August. At the provincial level, 49% of businesses in Malaga were fully booked.
Yesterday Thursday 26 March, the Lower House of the Spanish Parliament ratified the amendment to article 319 of the Spanish Penal Code, approved by the Senate last 12 March. A paragraph has been added to section 3, which reads: “In any event, the Judges or Courts of Law may issue a reasoned order to demolish the works and restore the physical reality altered at the expense of the principal thereof, without prejudice to the compensations due to third parties in good faith, and, assessing the circumstances and after hearing the competent government body, shall temporarily subject the demolition to the constitution of guarantees that ensure their payment. In any case, the seizure of the earnings from the offence shall be available, regardless of the transformations that these may have undergone”.
This new regulation will be into force next 1st July.
Until now, in proceedings regarding an Offence against Town and Country Planning, the judgment ordered the demolition of what had been built illegally and compensation was set by way of civil liability for the developer, in favour of buyers acting in good faith. The problem is that, in most of these cases, collecting said compensation was very complicated since the developer was either insolvent or had disappeared. However, enforcement of the demolition was not stopped, for which reason we could find ourselves before an unfortunate scenario where a buyer acting in good faith and recognised in a judgment could have his home demolished without being effectively compensated.
From now on, in criminal proceedings for Offences against Town and Country Planning, the judge may stop the demolition of the home until due compensation to the third-party acting in good faith is guaranteed.
From the literal wording of the amendment introduced, it seems that the judge will be the one who, after assessing the specific situation in each case, will stop said demolition, for which reason I understand that it will be an essential requirement to prove that the buyer is really a third party acting in good faith.
Likewise, it seems interesting that, in assessing whether to stop the demolition, it is required for the competent Government Body, which I take to be the City Hall, to be heard in the proceedings. I suppose that, in these cases, the City Hall can provide relevant details leading to stopping the demolition. Also, since the City Hall is the one responsible for executing the demolition, it may argue on the suitability of stopping it until it can ensure compensation for the third party acting in good faith.
Lastly, this amendment refers to stopping the demolition temporarily, i.e., a specific period of time is not established but, in any case, it should not perpetuate over time. However, the concept of “temporarily” is very wide and it may be interpreted as sufficient time to guarantee compensation to buyers acting in good faith.
I can say, with full knowledge, that this amendment of the Penal Code has been possible mainly thanks to the work of two associations in Andalusia that have been working on protecting buyers acting in good faith for several years: SOHA and AUAN, especially noting the great work done by Gerardo Vázquez, a colleague of mine, attorney and legal adviser at AUAN. The efforts of these organisations and their mobilisation have made this amendment possible.
The aforementioned organisations, along with many others that have been created, are justified by the great problem faced in Andalusia, which has 300,000 homes built in non-developable land (NDL). On the Andalusian coast, due to foreign residential tourism, many buyers are foreigners and this has led these owners, facing the legal problems with these homes, to move to defend their interests, to strengthen and to tell authorities about the existing situation.
The main problem, at least in Andalusia, has been the complete inactivity and inefficiency of Urban Planning in Andalusia, which has led to a failure in regulating non-developable land in Andalusia and to the existence of many homes built on non-developable land.
Regulations with very fixed and strict criteria governing construction on non-developable land were approved. However, Autonomic and Local Governments have completely neglected to provide the necessary oversight to enforce these regulations.
From the beginning of the years of the housing bubble, the competent government bodies have shown no predisposition to initiate and solve disciplinary procedures against offenders, with all the legal consequences that this entails, such as demolishing what has been illegally built. The governing party in City Hall should have assumed the “feared” political price that these unpopular measures may have entailed.
Most of these buildings have everything: registered deed, pay IBI (Property Tax), are registered in the Property Register, have electricity and water, and have paid autonomic taxes such as ITP (Tax on Asset Transfer) and AJD (Stamp Duty).
Many of the properties have changed owners, meaning that the person responsible for construction is no longer the owner of the home. When these properties enter legal proceedings, third parties acting in good faith appear, affected by this situation that the Local and Autonomic Governments, with full knowledge, have allowed due to their complete inaction in the field of Urban Planning.
The regulations provided in the Urban Planning Law of Andalusia (LOUA) to govern the very strict use of non-developable land were based on environmental protection and on maintaining the rural value of a large portion of the Andalusian territory so as to preserve this environment and its values.
However, its lack of application due to a lack of real and effective control of what was being done on non-developable land has given rise to the failure of regulations on the use of non-developable land provided in the LOUA.
In reality, this has resulted in large rural areas becoming full of unregulated buildings, achieving the opposite effect, as the lack of protection of the rural environment is clear in these cases.
In practice, a total lack of protection of rural land has occurred in some areas under greater urban pressure, where, without controls or any type of criteria regarding what was being built at the architectural level, construction has been allowed, of palaces, warehouses, terraced houses, one-storey homes, towers and everything in between. There has also been no control of the necessary infrastructure or facilities for these homes to be used: discharge of sewage, illegal wells to obtain water, etc. Furthermore, many of these homes did not pay local building taxes, as the majority were not eligible to obtain a licence under the LOUA.
However, as we explained in a previous post, it should be noted that, in some cases, the licenses for segregation, building and initial occupancy were indeed granted for some of these homes. The fact that the Government is responsible in these cases is more than obvious and the damages suffered by owners, who purchased the homes in good faith, are completely reprehensible.
This situation of deregulation of non-developable land has an undesirable effect on citizens, as there is a feeling that there are citizens who ignore the law and go unpunished and that there are others who are required to comply with it.
If the urban planning disciplinary proceedings had been started quickly and efficiently at the beginning of that frenzied period of real estate development on non-developable land, the message that citizens would have received would have been very clear and many buildings would not have been built. There would still be homes on non-developable land but the magnitude of the problem would be quite different.
Faced with this situation, the legal response to solve this problem should be consistent with the reality that exists and that has been tolerated by the Government itself for so many years. This is why the necessary legislative reforms in this area must be tackled rigorously and without propaganda messages, avoiding a focus on the debate on “amnesty for everyone” or “offenders must pay” because the situation is much more complex.
In the administrative field, the majority of these homes should be regularised as, in many cases, penalties for using land illegally would have expired and many of the developers-builders are not the current owners.
In the future, there should be a debate regarding the effectiveness and efficiency of Urban Planning under current regulations, as well as regarding whether the regulation of non-developable land in the LOUA is adequate for the purpose it intends to fulfil.
In our postof last March on Inheritance and Donation Tax, we discussed about the fact that European non-resident citizens in Spain were experiencing discrimination against resident citizens, because, under the same circumstances, they had to pay more taxes than resident taxpayers.
This unequal treatment happened when the deceased or beneficiaries were non-resident in Spain and they paid taxes in conformance with a State regulation which was more detrimental than the regional one, which was only applied to resident citizens.
This discrimination was confirmed by the European Court of Justice ruling dated 03rd of September 2014, which resolved this issue and established that Spain was infringing the free movement of capital within the EU, because of this separate treatment between resident and non-resident citizens.
On the 1st of January 2015, in order to comply with the aforementioned judgment, the amendment of the State Inheritance Tax regulation has entered into force in Spain. A special scheme has been introduced in regards of the Inheritance Tax, so that non-resident citizens in Spain who are European residents may apply the regional regulation as residents already do, equating their situation.
This new regulation establishes that in the event that the deceased is a European non-resident in Spain, the European non-resident beneficiaries may apply the regional regulation where the most valuable assets are located in Spain. If the beneficiaries are resident in Spain, the regional regulations where they reside shall be applicable.
If the deceased has been a resident in a Spanish region and the beneficiaries are non-resident in Spain, the non-resident beneficiaries shall pay inheritance tax in conformance with the regional regulations where the deceased resided.
At this point, it is worth mentioning that the collection of the Inheritance and Donation Tax in Spain is assigned to regional governments, so that they are free to set forth their own regulations.
The effect of this assignment is that the amount to be paid for this tax by Spanish residents may significantly vary depending on the region where they live. In fact, a fiscal “war” has arisen between regional governments as regards of this tax, because some people have decided to establish their residence in regions with a more favourable tax scheme in order to pay fewer taxes for inheritance and donations, particularly those with more valuable estates.
The most recent and famous case in Andalusia was that of the late Duchess of Alba, who was sentimentally related to Andalusia but not fiscally, because her residence for tax purposes was in Madrid. The main benefit of this fact is that her beneficiaries have had a tax saving of more than 90 million Euros in the Inheritance Tax.
Since non-resident citizens will also enjoy the same Inheritance Tax regulation than resident citizens and considering that the regulation to be applied is that of the region where the most valuable assets are located, this unequal treatment between regions will also affect them.
However, imagine that you are a non-resident in Spain, do not have any property, but you have some money in a bank entity in Spain. In this case, which regulation shall be applicable for your beneficiaries? It seems that the applicable regulation shall be that of the region where the bank registered office is located. Thus, it is not the same a bank entity with registered office in Madrid, Barcelona or Seville, for instance. It has been said “it seems” above, because a definitive answer has not been obtained when contacting the Tax Administration Office in respect of this issue.
In short, these are good news for European foreign citizens and their beneficiaries, and welcome to the regional regulatory “chaos” in respect of Inheritance and Donation Tax.
During our stay at the Second Home fair in Utrecht this March we received several questions about the new Spanish ´Golden Visa´ (or ´Investor Visa´) from professionals with wealthy clients in China and Africa. With the rapidly growing middle and upper-class in these new economies, these questions are rather interesting for us as a law firm specialized in property law / conveyance.
With this new investor visa law the Spanish government tries to attract foreign investors in order to stimulate the national economy, to give an impulse to the real estate market and to create more jobs. Politicians up to now are rather enthusiastic, as up to the 14th of April already 661 Golden Visa were granted to investors from China, Singapore, Japan, the United States, South America, the Middle East and Russia. With this article we´d like to inform you about the details of this Spanish law that became active on the 27th of September 2013.
Non-European residents can apply for the Golden Visa under several conditions. The ‘cheapest way’ for them is to buy a Spanish property with a purchase price of over € 500.000. But there are more options for the lucky few that can financially afford to immigrate to Spain. Investing in Spanish companies with shares of € 1.000.000, or having a Spanish bank deposit in Spanish financial entities of the same amount of money, will also do.
There is another option for obtaining a Golden Visa, which is buying Spanish bonds / public debt titles with a worth of € 2.000.000 or more (minimal duration 5 years). In addition, it´s also possible to obtain the Golden Visa by starting a business activity in Spain with a significant worth to the national economy, such as job creation, socioeconomic improvement or scientific/technology innovation. Of course, this officially needs to be approved by the Spanish administration (Economical and Commercial Office). The last option concerns high qualified professionals or transactions within the same company (issued by the Big Companies and Strategic Group Unit). The condition, of course, is that these professionals can´t be found on the Spanish employee market.
The rights of the residence permit apply to the permit holder and his spouse, children up to 18 years and also -due to health reasons- dependent parents or children over 18 years.
The Golden Via is granted for one year (a normal tourist’s visa only lasts for 90 days) and is renewable for two years, after which another two more years can follow (as long as the investment maintains). After these 5 years you would be entitled to apply for a long-term residency, but this permit will not be granted automatically. The requirement here for is that the applier has lived in Spain legally and effectively for five years, which means that within these 5 years he hasn´t lived abroad for more than 6 months consecutively and for not more than 10 months in total.
Of course, along with the permission comes a set of demands, of which the following are the most important. The person may not have stayed illegally in Spain before, can´t have a criminal record in Spain (o due to the Spanish legal system in the last 5 years) and he needs to have sufficient economic recourses for his (and his family´s) stay in Spain. It´s not obligated to have a tax residency within Spain, though, which makes the Golden Visa even more attractive for foreign investors.
Author: Francisco Delgado Montilla, C&D Solicitors (lawyers)
Torrox-Costa (Malaga/Costa del Sol/Andalucia)
As we already informed you in our previous news letter, C&D has been present at the Dutch Second Home fair in Utrecht last month. Being the only Spanish law firm on the fair, our daily seminars about the Spanish purchase process turned out to be the best attended during these three days, which proves that Spain is still a very attractive country for the Dutch to invest in. Also more than half of all exhibitors (mainly real estate agencies and developers) were focussed on Spain, which according to the organisation already has been the case for many years now.
In our stand we were able to speak to a lot of people with serious plans on buying a property in Spain, in most cases on the Costa del Sol or even particularly the Axarquia. The main issue in our conversations was to explain the important role of the lawyer during the purchase of a property in Spain. This situation is different from the Netherlands as in this country the lawyer´s work is completely done by the notary. We also got a lot of questions regarding wills and tax issues, for example on the subject of renting out a new bought property.
Stand of C&D Solicitors on Dutch Second Home Fair in Utrecht
Our daily seminar we held in both Dutch and English and we explained the different phases of the buying process with the various legal documents there are to sign (reservation contract, private purchase contract and the title deeds). Besides of this we gave some background information on the official investigation of the lawyer, by which the future owner can make sure he´ll buy his property with all possible guarantees and free of any risks. (The extended Dutch text of our seminar you can find on the home).
Looking back we can say that this fair exceeded our expectations and has been really successful for us. Not only in the perspective of attracting new clients but also as a learning experience of presenting our company on the Dutch market. Despite of the good weather this Second Home edition in Utrecht attracted around 5.000 visitors.
Author: Francisco Delgado Montilla, C&D Solicitors (lawyers)
Torrox-Costa (Málaga/Costa del Sol/Andalucia)
C&D Solicitors likes to inform you about the fact that we will be present at the Second Home Fair in Utrecht (the Netherlands) from the 28th until the 30th of March.
As the only Spanish law firm on this fair we´ll provide Dutch visitors with legal and fiscal information concerning the Spanish purchase process. We also have been invited to -together with our Dutch commercial assistant- give a daily seminar, which will start at 14:45 hrs. (seminar 1). After this seminar exists the possibility to ask us specific questions in the fair´s wine bar that will have a special theme on Spanish wines.
If you happen to be able to visit the fair, you can download free tickets through this link and we look forward to welcome you in our stand!
Author: Francisco Delgado Montilla, C&D Solicitors (lawyers)
Torrox-Costa (Malaga/Costa del Sol/Andalucia)
In the last few years, property market prices have dropped in Spain and the cases in which the National or Regional Tax Administration has reviewed declared values for property transfers have increased, whether for conveyance, inheritance or gifts; that is, you may sell your property for a certain and determined price, but the Regional or National Tax Administration may review that value after the sale and for tax purposes; then, it may consider that the real value of this sold property is higher than the one declared on the deed of sale, and therefore, the buyer shall pay the Transfer tax (ITP) on property transfer on the basisof the new value, which has been reviewed by the Regional Tax Administration, although the buyer had bought it for a lower price. In addition, the seller may have to declare capital gains higher than those actually obtained as a result of the review carried out by the National Tax Administration.
The abovementioned situation is legal and possible pursuant to Article 57 of Spanish general taxation law, in which it is provided that the Public Administration may check the property values by using different means.
Regarding urban properties, the Regional Tax Administraions and the Andalusian Regional Government are often supported on the grounds of an Order that is yearly approved to calculate the taxable minimum value of urban properties in this regard. As a result of this, it is possible to calculate this taxable minimum value from applying a rate provided by this Order to the details contained in the real estate tax IBI receipt (council tax). Then, you can know in advance whether the Tax Administration may claim more taxes or not when transferring your property.
Regarding rural real estate or properties with special characteristics, the matter becomes increasingly complicated, since Public Administrations may not always proceed by applying the aforementioned values and sometimes they are supported on the grounds of an expert report drawn up by technical personnel of the Tax Administration, which justifies the proven value of this rural or special property; for example, currently it is very common that the reviewed value for this type of properties is determined according to the estimated average values of construction, which are yearly publish by the Professional Association of Architects of Malaga. These values are indexed in a table containing the construction value per built square metre pursuant to the construction type and its features.
In the last year, as a result of this significant increase of value reviews by the Andalusian Tax Administration and, to a lesser degree, the National Government, our law firm always carries out an estimation of the taxable minimum value for tax purposes when advising our clients about property conveyance issues. Thus, they are warned of the possibility that their property value may be reviewed and the possible extra cost which may arise from this review. This is aimed at preparing our clients for this unpleasant surprise.
In general terms, the Andalusian Regional Tax Administration currently collects every single Euro from value reviews of property conveyances, so that if the taxable minimum value is higher than the conveyance actual value, it is quite normal that the Regional Government notifies you after a few months claiming the payment of the ITP tax on property transfer, stamp duty tax or gift and inheritance tax for the excess value reviewed.
The National Tax Administration, which is the competent body for capital gains collection of property sales, is not as determined as the Regional Tax Administration is when reviewing values. However, in those cases that the seller is not a tax resident and no capital gains has been obtained for the sale, when the 3 % withheld by the buyer is requested to be returned, the National Tax Administration does not hesitate to review the taxable minimum value of that property, so that the 3 % withheld is not returned in full to the seller. Furthermore, as a result of the reviewed taxable value, the seller may also have to pay the Tax Administration for capital gains tax, although no real gains had been obtained from the sale.
Obviously, there are grounds to challenge the property revaluations before the Public Tax Administration; however, in order to know if it is worthy to challenge it, it is important to examine and analyze each particular case in detail and determine if the reviewed value is properly justified before going ahead with the recourse.
Finally, it is also worth mentioning the possibility to file with the Tax Administration, prior to the property transfer, a binding report to obtain from the Tax Office the taxable value of this property. In some cases, it may be advisable to request this report, which commits the Tax Administration to respect it, although the value on this report will also oblige us for tax purposes.
Last Monday October 14th, the Regional Andalusia Government Junta de Andalucia carried out the demolition of two houses which were built without construction permit on non-developable land in the rural area of Las Terreras, in the municipality of Las Canteras, Almeria.
In this case, the developer did not have construction permits to build both properties. This is a different situation from that explained in our blog post in March, but there are also involved third parties in good faith, who bought the aforementioned properties to the developer/seller. The demolition of these properties means the infringement of a fundamental property right according to the interpretation of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which has demanded that:
– People affected by court or administrative proceedings which may imply the loss of their assets shall have the effective and real opportunity to defend their situation.
– Property loss due to general interest—for example, the compliance of planning legality over ownership of assets—shall be previously compensated to the owner.
Therefore, upon consideration of this European case law, it is not sufficient that in these two cases the judgment has assessed civil liability and the seller-developer is sentenced to compensate owners who bought these properties, but this compensation should be made effective prior to demolitions to avoid the risk that the seller fails to pay or is not able to pay and, as a result of this, third parties in good faith are not compensated. It should be noted that subsidiary liability of public administrations is not observed, as no construction permit was granted.
In order to guarantee the payment of compensations, appropriate actions should be taken prior to execute demolitions in the same proceedings for the enforcement of judgments. If this were possible, this situation should be determined as a reason to stop the judgment enforcement until compensations are paid to the affected owners. Obviously, each case should be analysed in order to determine whether the owner knew about the absence of construction permits and even though he was aware of the risk involved, he bought the property. In these cases, protection for these owners should be different.
Regarding certain information compiled by different means, there is a chronological perspective to be pointed out in respect of these two demolitions, which reveal the inefficiency of inspection and penalty procedures in regards of town-planning regulations, as well as the belligerent approach of public administrations participating:
– In 2004, the Andalusian Regional Government initiated a proceeding against the developer and he was fined because of the earthmovings in this area. Then, he was obliged to restore it to its original state. Obviously, the developer failed to comply with this order to restore it to its former state. In addition, the Town Council or Andalusia Regional Government should have acted in this moment, as well as they have done now, when carrying out the demolitions.
– In 2007, the Andalusia Regional Government officially ordered to the Town Council the demolition of the properties, as they have been built on non-developable land without construction permits. From 2004 to 2007, 3 years have elapsed. During this period of time the 4 properties were built and no competent public administrations did paralyze the works before they were completed. As a result of this, the completed houses were entered into legal transactions and then new owners arised. Why were construction works not paralyzed within these years?
– Once that the 4 properties were completed, the Town Council authorized water and electricity supply for them; this illegal authorization granted by the Town Council implied that these homes were appropriate to be occupied, as these supplies were essential for their sales.
– In 2012, The Andalusia Regional Government seemed to request the Town Council to execute the demolitions.
– In October 2013, the demolition of two properties was carried out by the Andalusia Regional Government, because the Town Council did not do so. The other two properties are also pending to be demolished.
Nine years have elapsed since the construction activities without permits are known until their demolitions were indeed executed. During this period of time, third parties in good faith have appeared and been affected by this situation. Have public administrations really done their utmost? Could have they acted earlier and with greater accuracy since 2004?
It would be a rather difficult task to think that the Andalusia Regional Government and Town Councils are not liable for a large number of homes built without permits on non-developable land in Andalusia—liability becomes obvious for those properties built with construction permits—since they had aerial images of each area, cadastral information and documents from the Payments Offices for transfer tax collection, which may have allowed them to protect non-developable land and enforce Andalusia town planning Act (LOUA). But they did not want to do so. Accordingly, as town planning duties have not been complied in respect of inspection and penalty procedures, the liability of Andalusia Regional Government and Town Council is joint and shared.
It is also worth mentioning the existence of certain arbitrariness on the part of public administrations when judgments were enforced, since older proceedings are still pending to be enforced and no actions are being taken on them.
Foreign residential tourism is a key factor for local economies in many areas; different national newspapers have been looked up and all of them echoed the new demolitions, which is a very harmful publicizing. They stressed the absence of economic compensations before demolitions were carried out, rather than demolitions itself.
It is not a question of implementing a general amnesty for all irregular acts executed on non-developable land without permits, since this may lead to a negative message for people who meet regulations. However, the fundamental property right should not be further infringed in conformance with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) case law and property right should be protected in Spain as a fundamental right. In addition a legal system which protects third parties in good faith should be provided in order to ensure legal certainty; inspection and penalty procedures should be carried out and should not go on forever due to the lack of interest of public administrations, so that their effectiveness may paralyze these type of constructions before they are entered into legal transactions; common sense and realism should be imposed and Regional Governments should be consistent with what has been accepted in these years, due to their failure to act or interminable penalty and enforcement procedures.
It seems understandable that town-planning legality will be now strictly enforced and hopefully it will be watched over. However, solutions should be provided from a logic and legal perspective for all previous cases.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
3rd Party Cookies
This website uses Google Analytics to collect anonymous information such as the number of visitors to the site, and the most popular pages.
Keeping this cookie enabled helps us to improve our website.
Please enable Strictly Necessary Cookies first so that we can save your preferences!
