You do not have any favourites
News
-
HOW TO LEGALLY RENT OUT MY HOME FOR VACATION?
5th July 2023 -
WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO HOUSING PRICES IN THE NEXT THREE YEARS?
4th July 2023 -
THE POLICE ADVISE: HOW TO AVOID GETTING ROBBED AT HOME DURING VACATIONS
3rd July 2023 -
THE DREAM MANSION OF BARBIE IN MALIBU IS UP FOR RENT AGAIN, BUT... FOR ONLY TWO NIGHTS AND FOR FREE.
2nd July 2023 -
THE 'CELESTIAL' AND '90S-INSPIRED' DECORATION THAT HAS GONE VIRAL ON TIKTOK
1st July 2023 -
INCREASE IN VACATION RENTAL SCAMS: TIPS TO PROTECT YOURSELF FROM FRAUDS
30th June 2023 -
THE SECRET TO MAKE YOUR HOME RENOVATION A SUCCESS... NOT A NIGHTMARE
27th June 2023 -
TIPS ON HOW TO PREPARE YOUR HOUSE BEFORE GOING ON VACATION.
26th June 2023 -
AN ALICANTE-BASED APPLICATION HAS MANAGED TO REDESIGN THE INTERIORS OF HOMES FROM MOBILE PHONES USING AI.
25th June 2023 -
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN VACATIONAL AND SEASONAL RENTAL
25th February 2023
THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONFIRMS THAT PLUSVALIA CAN BE CONFISCATORY
26th November 2019Some time ago the Constitutional Court determined that, if the transfer of the good had not generated profits, the Tax of the Increase on the Value of Urban Nature Lands (IIVTNU), better known as Municipal Capital Gain, could be collected when considering several articles of the Law of Local Haciendas.
Now the Constitutional Court goes further and has declared the capital gain tax unconstitutional when the tax quota is greater than the profit obtained by the taxpayer when transferring the property. That is, if there has indeed been a gain, but you have to pay surplus value more than what you have earned. This decision is taken after considering the Contentious-Administrative Court No. 32 of Madrid the unconstitutionality of demanding from the taxpayer a fee higher than the liquid benefit obtained by a transaction.
The Constitutional states that if the quota to be paid by the city council for this tax is greater than the gain that has been obtained with the transfer, the taxpayer would be paying for a non-existent, virtual or fictitious income, resulting in an excess of taxation that is contrary to the constitutional principles of economic capacity and non-confiscatoriness of article 31.1 of the Constitution, and that is why it determines that the payment of this tribute is unsurpassed and cannot be demanded.
The Constitutional Court, like the Contentious Court of Madrid, assumes that the expenses and taxes incurred in the acquisition and transfer of the property (registration, mortgage cancellation.) Can be discounted.
Source: ocu.org