Post by mdshamiul777 on Feb 12, 2024 5:05:30 GMT 1
The Tax on the Increase in the Value of Urban Land ( municipal capital gains ) since its implementation in 1988, has been the subject of extensive controversy. The origin of the controversy lies mainly in the fact that, as established by the Law regulating Local Treasury in its article 107, the tax base of this tax is constituted by the increase in the value of the land, revealed at the time of accrual ( transmission of the land) and experienced over a maximum period of twenty years. However, the town councils have been applying the tax rates provided for in article 108 of the Law regulating Local Treasury to the value of the land, consequently generating the obligation for the taxpayer to pay the tax even in those cases in which There is no real increase in the value of the land. Among the main detractors of said liquidation system, it is worth mentioning, first of all, the Courts and Tribunals, since there are increasingly more reiterated jurisprudential pronouncements that consider that when it is proven that there has been no increase in.
The real value of the land, it cannot be claimed. the payment of capital gains . In this sense, it is worth highlighting the ruling issued on July 18, 2013 by the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia, which has its antecedents in the Vietnam Email List rulings of the Supreme Court of April 29, 1996, September 25, 1997 and November 30, 2000. On the other hand, the municipal capital gain was also the subject of harsh criticism from some citizen platforms. The reason for this opposition was due to the confiscatory practice of certain city councils that abusively went so far as to demand the settlement of the tax even from those taxpayers who had been affected by mortgage foreclosure procedures or dation in payment for their habitual residence. All this despite the fact that no benefit has evidently been produced in these situations. However, the previous situation was corrected through the approval by the Government of Royal Decree-Law 8/2014, which established an exemption with retroactive effect from.
The payment of capital gains in the event of dación en pago or eviction. Likewise, the General Council of Economists (CGE) has also expressed its opposition to this tax, although for different reasons, in the report it published in December 2013, under the title 'For a transparent, orderly and predictable tax system, for the promotion of economic activity: suggestions for the reform of the tax system', stated that the capital gain "should disappear", since "it taxes an increase in the value of the land when a property that is already taxed as a capital gain in personal income tax is transferred. , and with greater perfection. Having said the above, it seems more than likely that in the future there will continue to be criticism of municipal capital gains from different sectors, with rulings identical in nature to those referred to above. It remains to be seen if the situation will reach sufficient magnitude to force the government to reform this tax or if, on the contrary, such criticism will only materialize through the claims that individual taxpayers can file before the Courts.
The real value of the land, it cannot be claimed. the payment of capital gains . In this sense, it is worth highlighting the ruling issued on July 18, 2013 by the Superior Court of Justice of Catalonia, which has its antecedents in the Vietnam Email List rulings of the Supreme Court of April 29, 1996, September 25, 1997 and November 30, 2000. On the other hand, the municipal capital gain was also the subject of harsh criticism from some citizen platforms. The reason for this opposition was due to the confiscatory practice of certain city councils that abusively went so far as to demand the settlement of the tax even from those taxpayers who had been affected by mortgage foreclosure procedures or dation in payment for their habitual residence. All this despite the fact that no benefit has evidently been produced in these situations. However, the previous situation was corrected through the approval by the Government of Royal Decree-Law 8/2014, which established an exemption with retroactive effect from.
The payment of capital gains in the event of dación en pago or eviction. Likewise, the General Council of Economists (CGE) has also expressed its opposition to this tax, although for different reasons, in the report it published in December 2013, under the title 'For a transparent, orderly and predictable tax system, for the promotion of economic activity: suggestions for the reform of the tax system', stated that the capital gain "should disappear", since "it taxes an increase in the value of the land when a property that is already taxed as a capital gain in personal income tax is transferred. , and with greater perfection. Having said the above, it seems more than likely that in the future there will continue to be criticism of municipal capital gains from different sectors, with rulings identical in nature to those referred to above. It remains to be seen if the situation will reach sufficient magnitude to force the government to reform this tax or if, on the contrary, such criticism will only materialize through the claims that individual taxpayers can file before the Courts.