Antonio Flores’ Blog

Offshore is definitely off. The times of the property owning offshore-based companies are over. The glamour associated with names such as Seychelles, British Virgin Islands, Turks & Caicos etc., has now turned into a stigma. Because there was a time in Spain when, if you went to certain summer cocktail parties or high-flying bashes and you did not own an offshore company based in some fanciful island, you were a nobody. In fact, your lawyer was quickly tagged as unsophisticated, uncreative, in essence, not up to scratch with this new posh trend that was all the rage among the richer.

The Mallorca Provincial Audience (May 2010) has sent a lawyer to jail for almost 4 years and given him a fine or €600K  for setting up a “fiscal engineering scheme to instrumentalise defrauding and money laundering procedures “, in the sale of a property in Puerto Pollensa (Mallorca). In this case, he had set up the structure to, among other aims, avoid (or rather evade) paying Capital Gains Tax (at 35%) on the real price (as opposed to the officially declared) when selling his client’s property.

According to the prosecutor, and the judge in the examined ruling, the investigated  law firm indiscriminately offered offshore companies, via the website offshore.biz site (in which even two Mallorca notaries were mentioned), to their clients with the intention of:

• Minimizing the tax almost to the point of exemption.
• Offering 100% protection to the assets.
• Offering 100% anonymity.

The message this Court ruling has sent out is a very clear one: using offshore companies to hold Spanish property does not entitle the beneficiary to legally avoid payment of taxes in Spain, whether you sell the shares, and alongside it, the property. This applies also to the buyer of the structure, who is not exempt from paying transfer taxes.

The Court Office, in reaching its decision, invoked the following:

• Non-Resident Act 5/2004: Capital Gain Taxes obtained, directly or indirectly, from property situated in Spain, will be taxed in Spain. In particular, the following gains are included: when they are originated or derived from rights or shares of a company, resident or not, which assets are made of up of, primarily, directly or indirectly, property based in Spain. The gains obtained from transferring the shares of a company, resident or otherwise, that attribute its ultimate owners the right of their enjoyment in Spain.
• Double Taxation Agreement between Spain and Ireland of the 18th of November 1986: the gains derived from the sale of property can be taxed where the property is located (for some reason, this was invoked as part of the defence strategy).

In this case, the tax office, assisted by the police, found enough evidence of the crime when they were given authorisation by the court to raid the firm’s premises, in which they found not only crucial information on the transaction (particularly deeds of share transfer and deeds of resignation of director and appointment of new director, both done on the day that the property changed hands, bank transfer slips, etc.) but also a private purchase contract for €875,000 for the property in question, when the price paid officially paid was €425,000.

Finally, the Tax Office’s report puts under serious scrutiny Law Firms that, apart from offering the standard juridical, financial and accounting services, have specialized in the design of schemes and structures of fiscal engineering that are utilized to defraud and launder money. These professional firms, which act as company incorporating agents, don’t have as its object international fiscal planning, but are purveyors of mechanisms for subjective simulation, by inserting physical and juridical persons, national and foreign, in the ownership of the assets they intend to conceal. The mechanisms, according to the Tax Office, are as follows:

1. Incorporation of offshore of property holding companies (offshore-based) .
2. Incorporation of Spanish Companies (mostly Limited-SRL), owned by the above offshore, to manage Spanish property. These companies are merely holding property, having scant bank movements.
3. Appointment of directors different from the ultimate owners, either being the same lawyers that created the structure or, as in the case study, someone paid to do the job (and who has also been sentenced to a jail term, albeit suspended). These persons are also authorised to operate both the offshore and the onshore accounts and are, at times, beggars pulled off the street. 
4. Utilization of the law firm’s clients account to receive and remit transfers, with the intention of a) concealing the true nature of the transactions behind the transfers and b) avoiding compliance with anti-money laundering provisions (thereby making it more difficult to know the real nature of the deal).

As a result of the above court action, the lawyer, the ultimate beneficiary and the director were all sentenced to jail terms, although only the lawyer will have to serve time, for the beneficiary paid up the taxes owed prior to the hearing (€135,000) as well as the fines, and the director was found guilty only of conspiracy to defraud.

Offshore is definitely off, and therefore it would be advisable that anyone willing to sell a property owned by a string of companies opted for not selling the shares abroad, because, not only all the above could easily be applicable, but also whoever was buying them would be buying into problem, unless of course he/she was sitting on a pile of cash he wanted to get rid of…(not advisable anyhow).

It may be interesting to see how this links with this new trend of incorporating UE based companies to avoid Spanish Inheritance Tax, particularly UK based, but will leave the study of this dubious proposal for a separate post.

Antonio Flores Companies, Corporate Law, Inheritance, Property, Taxes offshore companies, spanish capital gains tax, spanish inheritance tax

Spanish tax law is slow to keep up with the new times and so when buying (and selling) at discounted prices, a common occurrence these days, it may well happen that in 6 months from completion we receive a letter from the tax office asking us to pay more tax.

This is exactly what happened to a client who approached us after purchasing a property in Benahavis for €250,000, when he was sent the letter asking him to pay an extra €3,850, on account of Transfer Tax (7%) on €305,000 which is the value property should have, according to the tax office.

Why does this happen? Well, the regional Tax Offices in charge of transfer taxes uses a calculator which tells us what the minimum value each property should be sold at and therefore, if any property is sold under this value they will recalculate our tax declaration and will request that we pay the balance, using the property which has been bought as a guarantee of payment (a charge is immediately placed in the land registry).

Possible scenarios and options:

• What can be done before you buy? If you are buying a property at a discounted price we suggest that the minimum value is known prior to entering into negotiations with a seller and if there is a likelihood that the tax will be more then use when negotiating a price, to your advantage. So if you want to know what is the assessed value for tax purposes of a property in Andalusia, according to the Tax Office, you can do so by using this calculator (note that although an accurate calculation it is not legally binding).
• And if you have already bought and receive the letter…? If it was already known and made part of the deal then it gets paid, but if we receive the letter “out of the blue” (because we never suspected it could happen) then it can either be paid or appealed, a process likely to run into a 2 year period (but nowadays they can be won as judges consider that a calculator is no substitute to a proper valuation to be carried out in situ).
• And what if we are selling? This is a more complex case as the tax office in charge of capital gains tax (CGT) is the national AEAT, which does not use the above calculator but does actually send over property valuers. If this is the case, of which our firm has had very few in the last seven years, we will analyze the facts and merits of the case and advise on what the best course of action is. In one case we had our client had sold cheap (€350,000) because he had personal financial matters to resolve and soon after selling he left the country with the proceeds (very small, incidentally), so we have not heard more from the AEAT Tax Office who reported the real value to be of €450,000. Again, an appeal here is also an option.

If you want to avoid surprises it is possible to apply for a legally binding value report, whether you are buying or selling, which your lawyer can apply and obtain for you.

Antonio Flores Property, Taxes capital gains tax spain, complementaria, property taxes in spain, spain property tax, spanish capital gains tax, spanish property capital gains tax, spanish property tax, spanish property taxes, tax on spanish property