When a taxpayer acquires a home in Spain, he or she can use the website of the autonomous community's tax office to find out the value of the property to pay the ITP or the ISD tax (depending upon the location) and avoid excessive payment. However, this tool is not valid for all self-employed communities and may require a fee if they consider the value of the property to be higher. buy apartment qatar
Some autonomous collectivity tax authorities give citizens an online tool for valuing property to use for the purposes of the Property Transfer Tax, the Heritage and Gift Tax (ITP) (Impuesto de Sucesiones y Donaciones or ISyD).
The taxpayer therefore knows what values they must meet and thus avoids a value higher than declared when the property is checked. This instrument is not related to the assessment previously requested by taxpayers under Article 90 of the General Tax Law (Ley General Tributaria or LGT). This prior evaluation can be requested online or in person with a user certificate. For three months, the administration is bound to the value it communicates to the taxpayer, as recalled by José María Salcedo, partner of the Ático Jurídico law firm.
The problem arises when some governments believe that the assessment made on the Ministry of Finance website (without a user license) is not binding. The fact that the taxpayer declares the value to be respected, therefore, does not relieve the taxpayer from receiving a value check. Two Superior Courts of Justice maintain different criteria on this issue.
The High Court of Justice of Galicia, on the one hand, welcomes the online property evaluation. It argues that two procedures to obtain an administrative assessment cannot be established – one on paper (or online with a digital certificate), as defined in article 90 LGT, having binding effects for administration, and another by electronic means through the Regional Department website but without the need to identify and not be legally binding.
The Court therefore considers that the veracity of the data declared for the administration's assessment is the only thing that counts. In other words, if a taxpayer correctly enters in the web application the data necessary to identify and obtain a valuation, it must, even if the procedure is done without a digital certificate or without a written statement being submitted to the Minister, have the same consequences as those specified in Article 90, LGT.
However, the Catalan Supreme Court of Justice does not allow the values obtained via the online tool to become valid. The source of this method is the application of Article 57(1)(b) of the LGT valuation method (estimate by reference to the values appearing in the official tax registers).
This Court considers that this online assessment tool is intended solely for internal use by the management offices in Catalonia. In addition, the regional duty administration may check the values and estimate the property value higher than that set out in the online tool.
Nevertheless, the opinion of some judges who consider a check of the value in cases where taxpayers have paid taxes in line with their online valuation to be an abuse of the rights, as well as a breach of the principles of good faith, legal certainty and legitimate expectations, is mitigated in this judgment because the taxpayer is offered an online valuation and then havocated
Moreover, this personal opinion considers that the value review would be contrary to Article 134.1 of the LGT, which prevents a check on taxpayers declaring compliance, in accordance with any of the valuation methods referred to in Article 57 of the LGT, with the values published by the administration.
Ability to declare taxes below the deed value title
When a person buys a house, he or she knows he or she is required to pay an ITP tax, which varies depending on the independent community in which the house is located. They may pay this tax at the lower value stated in the sales act, but only if they have verified that it is the same as the value that the regional tax authorities attribute to it. The taxpayer, having declared his consent to the published values, could not initiate a checking process.
José María Salcedo considers, in this respect, that the rule of the procedure for valuation checks is Article 46.3 of the Act on the Property Transfer Tax, which provides that the value of a property is, at least, that as declared in the deed. Consequently, if the property was declared in accordance with the value admitted by the administration, such a procedure would not initiate, the article would not be applicable. However, the Tax Agency does not accept this interpretation and must be defended in court.