Has the principle of complementary tax been challenged?

After all, taxation of non-existent ‘Plus Valia’ was successfully contested. To explain, complementary tax is charged where a property is sold between willing seller and willing buyer. The tax authorities can come along up to 5 years later claiming the price was too low and tax both on the difference between what the tax authorities estimate the ‘correct’ price to be and what was actually paid. The need for this action is the endemic under-declaration of price paid when the sale is registered, but that occurs much less often and less extremely than it used to do. To be given only one month to object to the ‘correct’ price is further penalisation, as it’s in the nature of the situation that the buyer and seller address changes.

Apparently, the system is now being applied to rentals too. Many of those were paid cash so it’s fair for all society that income should be taxed as other is, as the wider the tax net, the less each person’s individual tax. In idealistic theory, as politicians are more likely just to look upon it as more money to spend.

The authority’s history of valuation is not impressive, as study to the ‘new’ Reference Values shows, with Survey Spain’s analysis over the last two years showing that they can vary from 17% to 382% of actual Asking/Selling/Valuation prices. Appeal against those is also difficult and can be costly.

This comment was initiated by reading the following article by Abaco – Complementary Tax in Spain (abacotaxes.com)