Holders of an easement are not required to pay Property Tax (IBI)

The nature of real rights over real estate determines the tax obligation for Property Tax (IBI). Recently, the Dirección General de Tributos (DGT) has specified the scope of this tax to avoid confusion regarding who must bear the economic burden when easements are involved.

What the DGT has ruled

The administration has determined that the taxable event for IBI is constituted exclusively through the ownership of certain rights: property, usufruct, surface rights, or administrative concessions. As this is a closed list, an easement falls outside of this scope.

Consequently, the holder of an easement is not a taxpayer. The tax obligation falls solely on the holder of the ownership right. The ruling also addresses the distribution of the burden between parties, clarifying that any private agreement regarding who should pay the tax is a matter of common law that has no effect against the Tax Administration.

What this means for you

If you are the owner of a property that is subject to an easement, the responsibility to settle the IBI with the City Council is yours. The fact that a third party holds an easement right over your property does not exempt you from your obligation as the owner.

Conversely, if you hold an easement right over someone else's property, you should not receive requests from the Administration for the payment of IBI, as this right does not trigger the taxable event. It is fundamental to understand that tax regulations do not recognize an easement as a right that generates this specific tax.

What you should do

In the event of private agreements where it is agreed that the easement holder will assume the cost of the IBI, it is necessary to keep in mind that such a distribution is valid between the parties but is not binding for the Administration. The City Council will always demand payment from the owner.

It is recommended to review the deeds establishing the easement and the agreements between the parties to ensure that the distribution of costs aligns with what was contractually agreed, understanding that the relationship with the local Tax Authority remains unchanged regarding the property owner.