Spain: New tax regime applicable to capital gains due to change of residence

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Spain: New tax regime applicable to capital gains due to change of residence

intl-updates

One of the most significant changes introduced in the latest reform of the Spanish Personal Income Tax Law (PIT Law) was the establishment of an exit tax, which is levied on certain unrealised capital gains on shares and other financial assets when a taxpayer transfers his residence outside Spain.

gomez-de-salazar.jpg
lopez-lopez.jpg

Eduardo Gómez de Salazar

Antonio López López

However, this is not an original provision in Spanish tax law because it already exists, or has existed, in the laws of some other EU nations and OECD member countries, which provide for 'exit taxes'.

Further, this is not the first time that the PIT Law has changed the usual tax treatment of certain income types as a result of a change of tax residence. This is something that already happens, so to speak, when a Spanish individual changes his tax residence to a territory classed as a tax haven, or with the inclusion in the taxable income of income that has not yet been taxed as a result of a change of tax residence.

The changes to the Spanish tax regime in the PIT Law entered into effect on January 1 2015. Under the rules, when a personal income taxpayer, who has maintained a Spanish tax status for 10 of the last 15 tax periods, transfers their residence to a new state, they must file a final Spanish tax for the last tax period they are resident in Spain. If the taxpayer owns shares or units in entities (including collective investment undertakings) the market value of which exceeds €4 million ($4.5 million) (or €1 million if they own more than 25% of the entity), they must include the positive difference between the market value of those shares or units on the due date of the last tax period for which they must file a Spanish tax return and the acquisition cost of those shares or units.

If the taxpayer changes their residence for work reasons to a country that is not considered a tax haven, or if the host country is a jurisdiction with which Spain has signed a tax treaty with an exchange of information provision, they may request a deferral of the tax debt by providing guarantees and bearing any late payment interest on the debt.

If the taxpayer relocates to an EU country, or a country in the European Economic Area (EEA) with an effective exchange of information, they will not have to pay or defer the exit tax as a result of this change of residence. The tax will only have to be paid, if within the 10 years following the last year the taxpayer was resident in Spain, one of the following circumstances arises:

  • The taxpayer transfers the shares or units inter vivos;

  • The taxpayer forfeits their status as a resident in the EU or EEA; or

  • The taxpayer breaches the regulatory reporting requirements.

Since its approval, this tax regime has been the subject of myriad comments and critiques relating to such questions as the valuation methods applied to the capital gains, or the regime's justification and validity under EU law.

On the one hand, there has been talk of extending the effects of the judgments issued by the European Court of Justice in relation to exit taxes approved by other EU member states and the tax sovereignty conflicts that may arise between those states and EU law with respect, among other issues, to the freedom of establishment or the double taxation that these kinds of gains may suffer, since there are no mechanisms that eliminate this type of double taxation in Spanish law or in the tax treaties yet.

It has also been argued that although it is aimed at taxing large fortunes, in practice it has entailed a limitation for entrepreneurs since it affects the creation, competiveness and growth of Spanish start-ups when they seek to expand their businesses abroad.

Recently, new uncertainty has arisen as to the future application of this regime in cases of transfers of tax residence to the UK, particularly since the Brexit vote, as it is unclear whether the UK will be a member of the EEA or not. This may lead to significant changes in the context of the exit tax for taxpayers who transfer their tax residence to the UK.

In light of the above, taxpayers who may be changing their tax residence should seek professional advice that examines whether this exit tax will be triggered and, if so, the alternatives available to at least defer it.

Eduardo Gómez de Salazar (eduardo.gomez.de.salazar@garrigues.com) and Antonio López López (antonio.lopez.lopez@garrigues.com)

Garrigues, Madrid

Website: www.garrigues.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

In the age of borderless commerce, money flows faster than regulation. While digital platforms cross oceans in milliseconds, tax authorities often lag. Indonesia has decided it can wait no longer
The tariffs are disrupting global supply chains and creating a lot of uncertainty, tax expert Miguel Medeiros told ITR’s European Transfer Pricing Forum
Corporate counsel should combine deep technical knowledge with strategic dynamism, says Agarwal, winner of ITR’s EMEA In-house Indirect Tax Leader of the Year award
Luxembourg’s reform agenda continues at pace in 2025, with targeted measures for start-ups and alternative investment funds
Veteran Elizabeth Arrendale will lead the new advisory practice, which will support clients with M&A tax structuring, post-deal integration, and more
MAP cases keep increasing, and cases closed aren’t keeping pace with the number started, the OECD’s Sriram Govind also told an ITR summit
Nobody likes paperwork or paying money, but the assertion that legal accreditation doesn’t offer value to firms and clients alike is false
Ryan hopes the buyout will help it expand into Asia and the Middle East; in other news, three German finance ministers have called for a suspension of pillar two
SKAT, which was represented by Pinsent Masons, had accused Sanjay Shah and other defendants of fraudulent dividend tax refund claims
TP managers must be able to explain technical issues in simple terms, ITR’s European Transfer Pricing Forum heard
Gift this article