View Full Version : The Tenerife illegal lettings thread
No Loaded , I fully expect you to disagree with anyone who has a different point of view but what is excruciatingly boring is the incessant interjections from your sycophantic glove puppet with meaningless trolling comments ! I wouldn't mind if they were constructive , even fact - based but they border i,in some cases to cyber bullying of some people and the disappointing thing is the MODS let it go !
I think my arguments hold plenty water and all of my points to tend to be based on facts , genuine questions and concerns !
As for you or anyone bullying me , don't make me laugh ! I was a negotiating shop steward for 33 years , I eat bullies for breaksfast
Blinkin heck JJ if your arguments hold so much water based on fact, why are you always sprouting rubbish? Loaded disagrees with you for that very reason. Here's some of your recent inept flames, no need to get all ruffled feathers if it doesn't bother you.
Recent inept post 1 (http://www.tenerifeforum.org/tenerife-forum/showthread.php?25665-What-is-the-cheapest-way-to-get-Internet-at-home-in-Tenerife&p=286973&viewfull=1#post286973)
Epic FAIL (www.tenerifeforum.org/tenerife-forum/showthread.php?23-The-Tenerife-illegal-lettings-thread&p=285802#post285802)
"You eat bullies for breakfast" - I hope that's from behind closed doors
x
junglejim
14-05-2013, 19:47
Right on cue !What a pair of ****s !
Right on cue !What a pair of ****s !
You've hit new lows..... Please block me
My recommendation, you should try to follow more, if you don't understand and jump to conclusions you'll just make yourself look silly. Let me help you to minimize those epic fails.
http://i43.tinypic.com/35d92jt.jpg
junglejim
14-05-2013, 20:03
Pair of absolute plonkers ! So you're not now cyber bullying then ?
Pair of absolute plonkers ! So you're not now cyber bullying then ?
Check this guy out with his silly comments - Epic fail (http://www.tenerifeforum.org/tenerife-forum/showthread.php?23-The-Tenerife-illegal-lettings-thread&p=285802#post285802)
Honestly : i disagreed with you and told you why i disagreed- i used no bad language or insults.... and you decide rather than contest the points I've disagreed on, it is easier to divert attention away from your poorly argued point and instead claim that you are being bullied ..... Good way to deflect attention from the initial argument - and you get to be the victim so it's harder to keep on about the original disagreement because then I'd be bullying you more.....
junglejim
14-05-2013, 20:15
Yawn!i´ve found a solution .
http://imageshack.us/scaled/thumb/837/94510310152776402155427.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/837/94510310152776402155427.jpg/)
Yawn!i´ve found a solution .
http://imageshack.us/scaled/thumb/837/94510310152776402155427.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/837/94510310152776402155427.jpg/)
Apply liberally to yourself....
Yawn!i´ve found a solution .
http://imageshack.us/scaled/thumb/837/94510310152776402155427.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/837/94510310152776402155427.jpg/)
p'off then
cheers
x
junglejim
14-05-2013, 20:40
Apply liberally to yourself....
I already have it´s a repellent , but obviously not effective !
I already have it´s a repellent , but obviously not effective !
It was a bit slow to work, it's often the same with cockroach sprays, but it's definitely worked now. Please pm me where to buy some, I think I need the large can
It was a bit slow to work, it's often the same with cockroach sprays, but it's definitely worked now. Please pm me where to buy some, I think I need the large can
You spray yourself with cockroach spray????
Her little green light went out
duncan-6
16-05-2013, 20:55
No, of course not Mark but from reading this thread it seems the law was passed in 1995 but has only been implemented in the last few years.
It that not correct?[/QUO
The corrupt Canarian government wanted to boost the construction industry & jobs in general & collect taxes from property sales etc then they were offered large brown envelopes from the the hotels & sole agents to implement the law, win win especailly for the banking industry in Switzerland.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Are you stalking Nelson this seems to be the only thread you post on and 90% of the time quoting Nelson :spin:
Am I stalking Nelson,...I dont "stalk" anybody!..have you been checking all my posts AR**HOLE ?
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
[QUOTE=nelson;286589]Loaded , tell the lady on your place who is renting 40 plus weeks per year on her own that it can't be true.
You said on here the other week, not long ago , that only sole agent overlords can fill an apartment at max occupancy.
How dare she destroy your argument, and right in your own domain too.
This independent usurper is showing that perhaps you are an unnecessary add on, even in your place
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
[QUOTE=Angusjim;286463]
Ha ha, yes this Duncan 6 character seems just a little bit strange. A member pm me a few weeks back to express concerns.he thought that Duncan 6 may be a front set up by one of my opponents. Duncan 6 is usually very personal and nasty in his posts, and looking back , you are quite right, I appear to be the only focus of his attention.
Maybe the member who messaged me was correct, Duncan 6 is a front for another member who wants to say a few more personal and nasty things but not in their actual member name?
Of course if you are real , Duncan, by all means you are entitled to your opinions on this open forum , and the rest of us are entitled to our opinions of you.
Oh Nellie, that's ever so kind of you to inform me that I'm entitled to my own opinion, and the "rest of us" can think what they like about me, you know how the song goes.....
AAAALLLWWWAAYYS look on the bright side of life, de dum de dum!!
slodgedad
16-05-2013, 21:45
Thread's getting silly again.
Can you please stay on topi.......ahh sod it.....
That spray stuff has worn off
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Amazon and google don't pay uk tax because their contracts are made in other countries, that is Ireland and Luxembourg
bonitatime
16-05-2013, 22:46
But have they got apartments they are renting out to tourists in Tenerife
It's a bit of a divergence from their general businesses
kiwiphil
16-05-2013, 23:49
Thread's getting silly again.
Can you please stay on topi.......ahh sod it.....
I thought the topic is insults and abuse?
Please allow the battle to continue un-moderated. We can't have independent readers thinking there are any intelligent, rational people associated with Tenerife, we must make them continue to think we're all raving lunatics.
Fivepence
17-05-2013, 00:56
[QUOTE=Angusjim;286463]
Am I stalking Nelson,...I dont "stalk" anybody!..have you been checking all my posts AR**HOLE ?
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
[QUOTE=nelson;286589]Loaded , tell the lady on your place who is renting 40 plus weeks per year on her own that it can't be true.
You said on here the other week, not long ago , that only sole agent overlords can fill an apartment at max occupancy.
How dare she destroy your argument, and right in your own domain too.
This independent usurper is showing that perhaps you are an unnecessary add on, even in your place
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Oh Nellie, that's ever so kind of you to inform me that I'm entitled to my own opinion, and the "rest of us" can think what they like about me, you know how the song goes.....
AAAALLLWWWAAYYS look on the bright side of life, de dum de dum!!
Something is wrong with the forum.
Posts by different members are for some strange reason being merged,
I have noticed this happening before.
duncan-6 has called me an A**HOLE because of posts that have been merged with mine.
Someone needs to look at this before it gets out of hand.
Check my posts #
7436
7438
7440
7443
7445
7447
7461
7474
7481
7495
7502
Then check Duncan's post #7518
The forum is faulty and it's causing ill feeling admin......it needs sorting ASAP
slodgedad
17-05-2013, 01:10
[QUOTE=duncan-6;287892][QUOTE=Angusjim;286463]
Am I stalking Nelson,...I dont "stalk" anybody!..have you been checking all my posts AR**HOLE ?
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Something is wrong with the forum.
Posts by different members are for some strange reason being merged,
I have noticed this happening before.
duncan-6 has called me an A**HOLE because of posts that have been merged with mine.
Someone needs to look at this before it gets out of hand.
Check my posts #
7436
7438
7440
7443
7445
7447
7461
7474
7481
7495
7502
Then check Duncan's post #7518
The forum is faulty and it's causing ill feeling admin......it needs sorting ASAP
?????????? Checked 4 of your quoted posts and don't know what you mean.
All I have found is normal quote replies.
Nothing has been merged, they are multi quotes.
Fivepence
17-05-2013, 02:02
slodgedad check Duncan's post #7518. If he has used the multi quote facility, it is only showing my user name and I only posted the first section.
It's definitly faulty.
If you look at your post above, Angus Jim did not make the quoted post????????
Duncan-6 posted that.
slodgedad
17-05-2013, 02:26
slodgedad check Duncan's post #7518. If he has used the multi quote facility, it is only showing my user name and I only posted the first section.
It's definitly faulty.
If you look at your post above, Angus Jim did not make the quoted post????????
Duncan-6 posted that.
If you look at the post again some of it has been copy/pasted.
As long as members keep doing this we will always have probs.
It annoys me when using a quote it is edited. I'm all for using part of a quote or highlighting a section but to add words is annoying.
It is something I wish the Forum could stop, but as long as there is an edit feature it is impossible.
The only way that I can think that it can be overcome is to make it compulsary to use the whole quote.
Bit boring that.
We would hope that members use the quote facility properly.
I know many don't and they are making it hard for others.
Angusjim
17-05-2013, 07:13
[QUOTE=duncan-6;287892][QUOTE=Angusjim;286463]
Am I stalking Nelson,...I dont "stalk" anybody!..have you been checking all my posts AR**HOLE ?
Correct on both counts thankyou:spin::laugh:
Amazon and google don't pay uk tax because their contracts are made in other countries, that is Ireland and Luxembourg
This has been clearly explained to you in previous posts, Nelson. And yes, Amazon do pay tax in the UK.
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/05/16/business/amazon-tax-bill/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
This has been clearly explained to you in previous posts, Nelson. And yes, Amazon do pay tax in the UK.
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/05/16/business/amazon-tax-bill/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
Yes some uk tax, but on the news last night the parliamentary committee chairwoman was on at them for paying tax in Ireland to pay less. They are legal to do that , any business worldwide can domicile in any tax country. They don't get involved with each and every country.
I knew this but clearly you can't grasp it.
Also last Sunday I read about a massive uk chemical firm that had moved head office and tax to Switzerland to pay less tax.
All the plants are in uk but for tax reasons this business is now a Swiss tax payer.
Yes some uk tax, but on the news last night the parliamentary committee chairwoman was on at them for paying tax in Ireland to pay less. They are legal to do that , any business worldwide can domicile in any tax country. They don't get involved with each and every country.
I knew this but clearly you can't grasp it.
Also last Sunday I read about a massive uk chemical firm that had moved head office and tax to Switzerland to pay less tax.
All the plants are in uk but for tax reasons this business is now a Swiss tax payer.
Yes, but these are cases of carefully constructed tax avoidance schemes for multi national companies ... I am afraid the average Joe Soap taxpayer is obliged to follow the normal rules :)
Nelson has 2 apartments on Sur y Sol, he lives in Yorkshire, is he not a multi national company thus be able to tax avoid legally in Tenerife?
Yes some uk tax, but on the news last night the parliamentary committee chairwoman was on at them for paying tax in Ireland to pay less. They are legal to do that , any business worldwide can domicile in any tax country. They don't get involved with each and every country.
I knew this but clearly you can't grasp it.
Also last Sunday I read about a massive uk chemical firm that had moved head office and tax to Switzerland to pay less tax.
All the plants are in uk but for tax reasons this business is now a Swiss tax payer.
Nelson, you are wrong, wrong and once again, wrong.
Why don't you read the bloody link????? They DO pay UK tax, ALL OF IT: They have negotiated grants with the UK, but that does not mean that they don't declare their UK earnings.
And yes, any company worldwide can tax domicile in any country. But what they cannot do is have a presence in a country and not declare their revenue to the tax authorities of that country.
Can you not "grasp it"? I hope you can, because if you were to put your views into practice in Spain, Germany, the UK, Switzerland, or any other country on this planet, you would be prosecuted!
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Nelson has 2 apartments on Sur y Sol, he lives in Yorkshire, is he not a multi national company thus be able to tax avoid legally in Tenerife?
If he was legally exempt from tax, he would have no problem in declaring his exemption to the authorities here and paying his zero balance.
Go on Nelson, give us all a laugh, contact the hacienda and tell them your side of the story. Show them your UK tax return. Tell them that Amazon get a grant in the UK which kind of covers their UK tax bill, so you think that you shouldn't pay anything in Spain.
Can someone explain how you could pay 7% IGIC in England without being registered for IGIC in the Canaries??????????
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
IGIC = Impuesto General Indirecto Canario = Indirect General Canarian Tax
Can someone explain how you could pay 7% IGIC in England without being registered for IGIC in the Canaries??????????
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
IGIC = Impuesto General Indirecto Canario = Indirect General Canarian Tax
Nelson will have a system and any minute now he will explain it to you whilst telling you that you don't know what you're talking about.He has an amazing talent for reading one thing and understanding something completely different.
Angusjim
17-05-2013, 12:37
Yes, but these are cases of carefully constructed tax avoidance schemes for multi national companies ... I am afraid the average Joe Soap taxpayer is obliged to follow the normal rules :)
Doreen you are not correct there is a very simple tax avoidance system in Tenerife which goes back generations :wink:
Albatros
17-05-2013, 12:42
Doreen you are not correct there is a very simple tax avoidance system in Tenerife which goes back generations :wink:
Technically that is known as 'tax evasion'.
Angusjim
17-05-2013, 12:46
Techically that is known as 'tax evasion'.
Technically correct
Hello Nellie ....
Been a while, but hey...
For the benefit of any doubts you may have, or confusion about your tax obligations, I think this will help you .....
Text taken from http://www.holidaylettings.co.uk/resources/owner-advice/buy-to-let-guide-for-your-holiday-home/tax-rules-on-holiday-lets-an-overview/a-1-29-2656/
All you need do is substitute the word(s) France with Spain and you will get to understand how this all works since it seems you do not understand ........
Tax due overseas on rental income
Many people overlook the fact that they have a liability to pay tax on the rental income in the country where their rental property is situated. This applies whether you are resident in that country or in the UK. This means that if you own a property in France, for example, you will need to submit a tax return to the French authorities showing your rental income (together with any other French sourced income), even if you don’t live in France.
As a UK resident you will also need to declare the income to HMRC. France has a “double taxation agreement" with the UK so in most cases you are unlikely to face being taxed twice on the same income.
The double taxation treaty grants partial relief against liability to tax in the UK. Where your UK tax liability is greater than the tax payable in France, the difference is paid in the UK. However, if the UK tax is less, there is no repayment of the French tax in the UK.
I hope the above will help you to focus on the fact that a word or three with the Hacienda could be a wise idea, especially before they decide to have some swift words with you?
article in the Island Connections about HAcienda having access to electricity bills to see which ones are being let and not let............
The clampdown continues.....
duncan-6
17-05-2013, 17:49
2 great things will happen later this year, 1: goal line technology/cameras in the premiership, 2: sole agents will be compulsory throughout Spain and ALL its islands, including Los Cristianos.
Doreen is wrong about the chemical company being tax evaders , it was in the Sunday times last Sunday, the firm just moved head office to Switzerland and tax for the entire business is now paid in Switzerland .
It's like if an international haulier based in uk takes a load to Spain he pays tax on profits in the uk. If he brings a load back from Spain to the uk for a Spanish business , they pay him to do it, think about it. He does not have to pay any tax on profits to Spain. He pays his tax on both journeys earnings in the uk.
Think about easyjet. Based in uk paying uk tax on profits, earning money all over.
Easyjet don't pay uk tax on passengers taken to Spain, but Spanish tax on the return load of passengers coming from Spain to England.
Even if you pay one way from Tenerife to uk in euros the profits are still entirely accountable and taxed in the uk.
A Spanish airline , eg Iberia or spanair , does just the same but all tax is accountable and payable in Spain. The uk does not get a look in.
So how much tax would the island take of all property here was owner by "Nelson's"????
Doreen is wrong about the chemical company being tax evaders , it was in the Sunday times last Sunday, the firm just moved head office to Switzerland and tax for the entire business is now paid in Switzerland
Excuse me ? Just where did I call them tax evaders ... I said they were following tax avoidance schemes (which are fully legal and a great source of fees for the large accounting houses) ... and then there is tax evasion which is illegal :)
kiwiphil
17-05-2013, 22:30
Doreen is wrong about the chemical company being tax evaders , it was in the Sunday times last Sunday, the firm just moved head office to Switzerland and tax for the entire business is now paid in Switzerland .
It's like if an international haulier based in uk takes a load to Spain he pays tax on profits in the uk. If he brings a load back from Spain to the uk for a Spanish business , they pay him to do it, think about it. He does not have to pay any tax on profits to Spain. He pays his tax on both journeys earnings in the uk.
Think about easyjet. Based in uk paying uk tax on profits, earning money all over.
Easyjet don't pay uk tax on passengers taken to Spain, but Spanish tax on the return load of passengers coming from Spain to England.
Even if you pay one way from Tenerife to uk in euros the profits are still entirely accountable and taxed in the uk.
A Spanish airline , eg Iberia or spanair , does just the same but all tax is accountable and payable in Spain. The uk does not get a look in.
Nelson, I know I shouldn't be bothered by the rubbish you write but it concerns me that some people might be mislead and think there is an element of truth to it. If you're just having a laugh and being liberal with the truth then no worries and apologies for taking your writings seriously.
But if you really think you are right about not needing to pay tax in Spain for your rental properties, are you willing to put some money on it?
This is to be settled by written correspondence with a qualified accountant as agreed by both of us. If we can't agree then we'll let one be selected by the forum.
nelson = juba
have you grasped it yet?
So how much tax would the island take of all property here was owner by "Nelson's"????
Best future tax policy for private apartments in the canaries , tourist letting, annual permit fee 1200 euro per apartment per year.
Hopefully 40 plus weeks per apartment per year of vitally needed tourist spend for the canary economy, and a good fiscal contribution from the industry for the islands.
slodgedad
17-05-2013, 23:01
Best future tax policy for private apartments in the canaries , tourist letting, annual permit fee 1200 euro per apartment per year.
Hopefully 40 plus weeks per apartment per year of vitally needed tourist spend for the canary economy, and a good fiscal contribution from the industry for the islands.
So you're willing to pay 24 euros a week. Very generous.
bonitatime
17-05-2013, 23:04
Unfortunately the elected Canarian government doesnt agree
welshman
17-05-2013, 23:23
Nelson, I know I shouldn't be bothered by the rubbish you write but it concerns me that some people might be mislead and think there is an element of truth to it. If you're just having a laugh and being liberal with the truth then no worries and apologies for taking your writings seriously.
But if you really think you are right about not needing to pay tax in Spain for your rental properties, are you willing to put some money on it?
This is to be settled by written correspondence with a qualified accountant as agreed by both of us. If we can't agree then we'll let one be selected by the forum.. Don,t waste your money you are required to pay tax in the country where the property is located . In Spain /Canaries you are required to declare quarterly over 90 days available for letting if you only let 60 days or 2/3 of the quarter you can only offset/claim 2/3 or 60 days of cost/ expenses. You will nearly always pay tax to the Spanish government. In uk with annual tax declaration which you can offset all cost against letting you will normally make a very small profit , but mostly a loss. Because of the way uk treats letting business
Best future tax policy for private apartments in the canaries , tourist letting, annual permit fee 1200 euro per apartment per year.
Hopefully 40 plus weeks per apartment per year of vitally needed tourist spend for the canary economy, and a good fiscal contribution from the industry for the islands.
But under the current system you agree that you pay nothing to the Spanish system at all and if all property in tenerife was foreign owned and foreign property owners did likewise then the island would receive no tax at all from property rentals?
Why do sensible and reasoned people reply to blatent trolling on here,doreen started this thread on the old forum over 3 years ago to highlight what was happening,i think that most people know whats going on whether you agree or not its happening,certain elements keep regurgitating the same old sh**e.PLEASE dont bite if you read the definition of an internet troll you will see the pattern that appears on this thread.oxygen of publicitity and all that
Best future tax policy for private apartments in the canaries , tourist letting, annual permit fee 1200 euro per apartment per year.
Hopefully 40 plus weeks per apartment per year of vitally needed tourist spend for the canary economy, and a good fiscal contribution from the industry for the islands.
Morning Nellie
Even IF (big if) the Government here were to impliment a system of some form of permit or licensing system under which you were able to let out your apartments as, for example has been introduced in Portugal, you would still be liable for paying local taxes on your income generated in the country on top of any costs you may need to pay for the permit/license.
Taking your beloved Portugal as an example, the rate of taxation is 15% (probably more now) on rental income on top of whatever fees and costs for letting licenses, and whilst there are some expenses/costs of maintaining your property which can be offset against that income, mortgage interest is not one of them. As here in Spain, and specifically the Canary Islands, if the Government were to introduce a similar system to allow you let out your holiday homes, the permit system would certainly not include local income tax as part of the cost nor would it include the Canarian equivilent of VAT - IGIC which, since the beginning of this year is applicable to all transactions with no nominal level below which any business or individual is exempt from having to charge it and pass it on to the Government.
I remember you posting some time ago that you dealt with your Canarian tax affairs entirely in the UK and specifically that you declared your earnings here to the UK tax office and you included your mortgages as part of your costs. This is so, so so wrong.
You simply cannot compare corporate entity tax affairs as the reasons for why you do what you do - the rules are simply not the same and nor will they ever be. You apply some very odd logic to your arguments on here - you blame the Canarian Government for the current state of the economy and suggest that if they were to allow you to continue to let your properties as you have been doing for many years it would be the solution to many of their problems, yet at the same time you openly admit that you have not contributed a cent to them from your earnings in their country.
You base your arguments soley on your belief that your clients will contribute to the local coffers by spending their money in restaurants, bars and taxi fares, making a presumption that the tax contributions from them should be more than enough for the Government to continue to provide the infra-structure required for your clients whilst you blatently and proudly continue to contribute next to nothing. You advocate a licensing system, and in fairness there is much support for this, but presume that any such licence would automatically include tax on the income you earn here and automatically include relief on your costs, including that of your mortgages.
Sorry mate, but this is simply not real life, it is, as you would perhaps compare it an Alice in Wonderland situation. If there were a permit system introduced in due course it would not give you carte-blanche to carry on without contributing to these islands - on top of your permit costs you would need to be paying 25 odd % income tax on your earnings, 7% IGIC from your clients and pay a local accountnt to prepare your returns - perhaps even allowing the company you use to take on an exra member of staff, thus assisting the local employment situation.
Whilst some of your costs would be offset against aginst your Canarian Tax liablility, it would not include interest relief on the cost of the financing of your little emporium, and no European Directive will pop along to help you when you are facing a fine from the Hacienda in court.
You really need to speak carefully to your UK advisors - they are so very wrong
Why do sensible and reasoned people reply to blatent trolling on here,doreen started this thread on the old forum over 3 years ago to highlight what was happening,i think that most people know whats going on whether you agree or not its happening,certain elements keep regurgitating the same old sh**e.PLEASE dont bite if you read the definition of an internet troll you will see the pattern that appears on this thread.oxygen of publicitity and all that
I think a lot of the repetition is aimed at Nelson trying to get him to actually READ - UNDERSTAND & IMPLEMENT advice that is clearly more correct than his current belief system (evidence across the Internet shows he is not doing things correctly at all).
I think muppet just hit the nail on the head .
The "trolling" would stop if he actually paid attention to what just about everyone is trying to tell him - we know he would like a "Portuguese system without a sole agent overlord" but in the meantime that means:
He needs a sole agent overlord, he needs to register with the tourist board via the sole agent, he needs to pay 24.75% tax in Spain and pay 7% IGIC too.
If the day ever comes where there is a Portuguese model he will still need to pay tax and whatever license there is.
Nelson seems to be comfortable with paying tax once the mythical Portuguese model is in place (which isn't even planned to happen) - but is reluctant to even accept that he has to pay tax in the meantime!
Altamira
18-05-2013, 10:03
Proposed New Tourist Laws Please no more taxing ping pong. Does anyone know how the Tenerife Government is getting on with their proposed new tourist laws and when they may be introduced? Is there any proposed changes to the percentage requirement (50% + 1) for sole agent appointments. Have any illegal rental owners had their bank accounts embargoed or charges made against their properties?
junglejim
18-05-2013, 10:08
Decent, sensible post Muppet , what I can see from that is ,given some of the figures Loaded provided and the taxes that have to be paid , the commission taken by the sole agent (and Loaded is one of the better ones !) , some of the restrictions on the usage of the apartment - where is the incentive for any new investors to move into the buy to let touristically?
The present owners area bit of a captured audience as they are and will be subject to the present and future legislation but any new people taking a look at the Touristic Package will surely look at the risk -reward side of the investment in the Canaries and decide there isn´t enough upside unless the rental prices go up (difficult in a recession) or there is a paradigm shift in the Touristic Model in the Canaries ?
I think a lot of the repetition is aimed at Nelson trying to get him to actually READ - UNDERSTAND & IMPLEMENT advice that is clearly more correct than his current belief system (evidence across the Internet shows he is not doing things correctly at all).
Several posts here refer to "malpractice" by estate agents and lawyers; unfortunately there just might be someone reading this who actually believes Nelson's argument, and invests in property thinking that they don't have to pay any taxes or register here.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Proposed New Tourist Laws Please no more taxing ping pong. Does anyone know how the Tenerife Government is getting on with their proposed new tourist laws and when they may be introduced? Is there any proposed changes to the percentage requirement (50% + 1) for sole agent appointments. Have any illegal rental owners had their bank accounts embargoed or charges made against their properties?
The BOE will be published shortly, once it is out I'll post a quick summary in English.
Investments have and will always carry a risk, whether it is in property or the stock markets.
Again from memory, I believe the general ROI (return on Investment) of a buy to let in the Canaries at current returns from sole agents is about 5%. If my memory is correct, then that is not actually a bad deal compared to, for example, long term investment plans offered by most banks at the moment which perhaps 2 or 3 %.
Property of course has usually been a safe investment as the real gain comes at the end when the property is eventually sold (Nellie - there is Capital Gains Tax here too!), but of course the ultimate return depends on property values themselves which have been falling here and in Spain generally for some years.
Bottom line though is I doubt that the restrictions on personal use would put that many people off buying here whereas the potential value at resale perhaps should. Current owners may well wish to get out of the market, especially those who bought at the height of the market, with some good bargains to be had at the moment, I would have thought interest in buying here would still be fairly bouyant.
The real shame of course is that very few resellers (agents) have been honest with their clients over recent years and not laid the law out in front of their clients as to what they can and cannot do with property under Canarian law.
Remember the bit that was always tagged onto adverts? "The value of your investments might fall because of market conditions and sound financial advice whould be sought" ?? or words to that effect!
All that said, the question must be asked of how much better off the Spanish (and Canarian) economy might be if every second home letter were paying everything they should and in the right place.
You can't blame the Canarians for enforcing their (EU approved) letting laws, nor for sticking with the sole-agent system on the basis that at least someone can be held to account (sole agent) for ensuring compliance with fiscal law. In many ways those who have been part of the Jiffy Bags in the post with keys, and payment in cash/PayPal systems of the past only have themselves to blame for the clampdown.
Had there not been such a huge under-the-counter market develop in the first place, arguments for introducing a license system and doing away with overlords could (perhaps should) have been more effective.
yeah and tourists are rubbish drivers
x
yeah and tourists are rubbish drivers
x
It's the Loro Park stickers wot does it innit !
kiwiphil
18-05-2013, 18:02
. Don,t waste your money you are required to pay tax in the country where the property is located . In Spain /Canaries you are required to declare quarterly over 90 days available for letting if you only let 60 days or 2/3 of the quarter you can only offset/claim 2/3 or 60 days of cost/ expenses. You will nearly always pay tax to the Spanish government. In uk with annual tax declaration which you can offset all cost against letting you will normally make a very small profit , but mostly a loss. Because of the way uk treats letting business
Nelson, do you agree that Welshman is correct? I'm not asking if you like the law, just if you finally accept that you need to pay tax in Spain? If you don't agree, then put your money up and lets get an official ruling.
Nelson, do you agree that Welshman is correct? I'm not asking if you like the law, just if you finally accept that you need to pay tax in Spain? If you don't agree, then put your money up and lets get an official ruling.
He won't answer directly....
If you want an answer from a well known accountant in los Cristianos I can email and ask on Monday not that there is any doubt...
Angusjim
19-05-2013, 07:26
Can all the completely honest and god fearing people who come on this thread banging on about paying ALL your taxes care to swear on their children's life that they have never ever evaded paying all tax due themselves EG maybe a tradesmen that has been paid cash for a job and did not declare it or maybe you have paid cash to someone knowing full well they won't be paying tax on it and have not charged you VAT or IGIC that was due.
The odd bit of cash is slightly different than years and years of renting out two apartments for 40 weeks a year each.
Does Nelson pay 'non letting tax' instead?
Anyone paying neither should be easy for the Canarian taxman to find. A quick trip to land registry by a couple of efficient clerks (if they have any) and away they go, thousands of euros found for the island!
Angusjim
19-05-2013, 09:08
The odd bit of cash is slightly different than years and years of renting out two apartments for 40 weeks a year each.
Does Nelson pay 'non letting tax' instead?
Anyone paying neither should be easy for the Canarian taxman to find. A quick trip to land registry by a couple of efficient clerks (if they have any) and away they go, thousands of euros found for the island!
I am sure if all the "odd bits of cash" not paid by the tens of thousands was added up in Tenerife it would add up to a lot more than lost illegal letting tax revenues keeping in mind not all illegal letters have not paid their tax.
Can all the completely honest and god fearing people who come on this thread banging on about paying ALL your taxes care to swear on their children's life that they have never ever evaded paying all tax due themselves EG maybe a tradesmen that has been paid cash for a job and did not declare it or maybe you have paid cash to someone knowing full well they won't be paying tax on it and have not charged you VAT or IGIC that was due.
Are you trying to justify nelsons Canarian tax dodge over 10 years for 2 apartments with that of a tradesperon maybe not declaring a couple of bills ?
It doesn't really matter here Jim as most tradespersons are on the module system and pay exactly the same if they declare aunt fanny's €50 call out or not.
I personally bill or declare everything because it's for my advantage as I'm still able to borrow money from the bank at reasonable rates.
Angusjim
19-05-2013, 09:24
Are you trying to justify nelsons Canarian tax dodge over 10 years for 2 apartments with that of a tradesperon maybe not declaring a couple of bills ?
It doesn't really matter here Jim as most tradespersons are on the module system and pay exactly the same if they declare aunt fanny's €50 call out or not.
I personally bill or declare everything because it's for my advantage as I'm still able to borrow money from the bank at reasonable rates.
Mark I am not trying to justify anything if he is due to pay tax then he should pay it, I am just sick to death of all the hollier than thou people on here that seem to be perfect model citizens there is a HUGE tax issue throughout Spain not just illegal letting. Have you never pocketed cash from jobs at any time in UK or Tenerife ? if so you must be the only few sparkies / tradesmen who has not and if that is the case then god bless you for your complete honesty.
kiwiphil
19-05-2013, 09:27
Can all the completely honest and god fearing people who come on this thread banging on about paying ALL your taxes care to swear on their children's life that they have never ever evaded paying all tax due themselves EG maybe a tradesmen that has been paid cash for a job and did not declare it or maybe you have paid cash to someone knowing full well they won't be paying tax on it and have not charged you VAT or IGIC that was due.
There's a big difference between knowingly dodging a little bit of tax here and there and claiming that the rules do not apply to you.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Nelson doesn't actually believe that he should be paying tax here? The irrelevant quoting of EU laws, WWII, Google, Amazon, airlines and other industries is just that - irrelevant. Just come out and say "I understand the rules, I'm going to dodge them".
Angusjim
19-05-2013, 09:36
There's a big difference between knowingly dodging a little bit of tax here and there and claiming that the rules do not apply to you.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Nelson doesn't actually believe that he should be paying tax here? The irrelevant quoting of EU laws, WWII, Google, Amazon, airlines and other industries is just that - irrelevant. Just come out and say "I understand the rules, I'm going to dodge them".
Not really any difference both end up with no tax paid, but in his case he said he has paid tax in the UK which turns out to be wrong and he has maybe been given bad advice by his accountant in the UK. To be honest I personally think he is knowingly winding up a lot of people on here about many things
Mark I am not trying to justify anything if he is due to pay tax then he should pay it, I am just sick to death of all the hollier than thou people on here that seem to be perfect model citizens there is a HUGE tax issue throughout Spain not just illegal letting. Have you never pocketed cash from jobs at any time in UK or Tenerife ? if so you must be the only few sparkies / tradesmen who has not and if that is the case then god bless you for your complete honesty.
Like I've already said it's to my advantage to declare everything. It's not a model citizen it's just how i prefer to work.
I was just picking up on your constant view of the locals not paying tax and are as corrupt as hell which can be seen in many of your recent posts. Brown envelopes under the table etc etc
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
To be honest I personally think he is knowingly winding up a lot of people on here about many things
Of course she is, since day one.
Angusjim
19-05-2013, 09:47
[QUOTE=9PLUS;288340]Like I've already said it's to my advantage to declare everything. It's not a model citizen it's just how i prefer to work.
I was just picking up on your constant view of the locals not paying tax and are as corrupt as hell which can be seen in many of your recent posts. Brown envelopes under the table etc etc
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
I asked you have you EVER, not what you do now. I base what I say on conversations with ex pats that I know in Tenerife and having dealt with companies and "professionals" when I had my apartment over there and my classic conversation with my accountant about paying his account in cash for his services " to save us both money".
Does it hold any relevance to this thread if i said yes or no or what i may or may not have done in the UK 20 years ago?
It will not be any benefit to any forum member nor the Canarian people, it will not justify nelsons tax dodge nor the subject of illegal letting and sole agents.
Really the only way the tax issue should be involved in this thread is when and if these fines actually come about, the Spanish tax office will be on to them like a bat out of hell and when people blatantly say they don't pay tax.
Angusjim
19-05-2013, 10:23
Does it hold any relevance to this thread if i said yes or no or what i may or may not have done in the UK 20 years ago?
It will not be any benefit to any forum member nor the Canarian people, it will not justify nelsons tax dodge nor the subject of illegal letting and sole agents.
Really the only way the tax issue should be involved in this thread is when and if these fines actually come about, the Spanish tax office will be on to them like a bat out of hell and when people blatantly say they don't pay tax.
Its only relevant if you have in past not paid all your taxes but now think it is a sin for people to do do it now its called double standards. By the way Mark I am not trying to pass judgement on you or anyone. I have heard some great stories from from a very respected member famed for his upfront honest business practices about long letting Canarian landlords who refuse to take rent paid into banks they want to come round and collect cash why would that be ?
But as has been said many times before and often when the anti letting people go tax enraged blind, the issue is not centred on tax. The issue is about the holiday letting industry, the straightforward renting out of people's holiday homes, a massive industry, one that exists world wide, and a very large and important industry that has existed in the canaries for many years.
The central issue is the attempt by the canary govt to completely cease and destroy the holiday home letting industry and to try to pretend that the only type of self catering accommodation legally available in the Canary Islands had to be a collection of privately owned apartments rented out by a sole agent overlord, and organised like a converluted hotel.
That's the central issue, sorting out a tax contribution from the holiday letting industry is necessary , the lack of proper attention to the issue over the years is largely because the Canarian govt , in their Alice in wonderland world, imagined that there was no letting of holiday homes, just their own silly artificial sole agent concept of self catering, and so they themselves never engaged with the fiscal potential there, and therefore it was the govts mismanagement that created a black economy and loss of revenues.
Red Devil
19-05-2013, 10:45
I owned an apartment for quite a few years on what is now considered an illegal ex tourist complex.
As it was my 2nd apartment I declared and paid all my taxes in Tenerife and what a faff that was submitting all details every 3 months.
The government gladly took my money even though if I had still got the apartment I could in theory have been fined for illegal letting - odd that isnt it.
No-one said to me then "oi thats illegal, better not take your money," not even my accountant in Los Cris who made a nice tidy sum out of me over the years, nor the lawyer who insisted the seller needed to accept a separate amount of money (15,000euro) over and above the price declared on the escritura so no pious talk from anyone on here please about the Canarian government being ripped off.
Oh and of course the "assumed lettings tax" I paid on both my properties every year. Then when I sold they held on to 3% of my proceeds for almost 18 months.
kiwiphil
19-05-2013, 11:03
But as has been said many times before and often when the anti letting people go tax enraged blind, the issue is not centred on tax. The issue is about the holiday letting industry, the straightforward renting out of people's holiday homes, a massive industry, one that exists world wide, and a very large and important industry that has existed in the canaries for many years.
The central issue is the attempt by the canary govt to completely cease and destroy the holiday home letting industry and to try to pretend that the only type of self catering accommodation legally available in the Canary Islands had to be a collection of privately owned apartments rented out by a sole agent overlord, and organised like a converluted hotel.
That's the central issue, sorting out a tax contribution from the holiday letting industry is necessary , the lack of proper attention to the issue over the years is largely because the Canarian govt , in their Alice in wonderland world, imagined that there was no letting of holiday homes, just their own silly artificial sole agent concept of self catering, and so they themselves never engaged with the fiscal potential there, and therefore it was the govts mismanagement that created a black economy and loss of revenues.
So? Really, so what?
They make rules, good, bad or otherwise. They are entitled to change the rules. As you don't like it, sell up and go somewhere where you do like the rules. Or become a resident and get involved in politics and convince them that there is a better way to maximize the island's potential.
This is rather like arguing about the weather in the UK. We have just as much ability to influence it.
But as has been said many times before and often when the anti letting people go tax enraged blind, the issue is not centred on tax. The issue is about the holiday letting industry, the straightforward renting out of people's holiday homes, a massive industry, one that exists world wide, and a very large and important industry that has existed in the canaries for many years.
The central issue is the attempt by the canary govt to completely cease and destroy the holiday home letting industry and to try to pretend that the only type of self catering accommodation legally available in the Canary Islands had to be a collection of privately owned apartments rented out by a sole agent overlord, and organised like a converluted hotel.
That's the central issue, sorting out a tax contribution from the holiday letting industry is necessary , the lack of proper attention to the issue over the years is largely because the Canarian govt , in their Alice in wonderland world, imagined that there was no letting of holiday homes, just their own silly artificial sole agent concept of self catering, and so they themselves never engaged with the fiscal potential there, and therefore it was the govts mismanagement that created a black economy and loss of revenues.
Nelson, you invested into a business when the rules were already in place. Nobody forced you to do it. If you were misinformed, that is not the governments fault.
As Kiwiphil says, either get involved with the democratic process or admit you made the mistake and shut up. As per previous posts, you will have a window of opportunity to challenge the new rules soon.
At least it appears that you now (grudgingly) accept that you were liable to pay your taxes to Spanish authorities over the last ten years, if so that's a huge step for mankind!
You are obviously fairly new to this thread , we have covered these arguments/ issues before , but clearly many new people do come along so things have to be re stated / re argued from time to time on here.
Spain is a country in transit from dictatorship to democracy, it's present democracy is a mere 28 years old , that follows a 36 year fascist dictatorship , an ally of hitler and Mussolini , the only fascist dictatorship in Europe to survive world war 2.
The they you describe are not at all the Canarian people who might agree with the govts policy on self catering holiday home renting, indeed nothing about the crackdown , the lack of prior warning, the massive fines, can be said to be fully in agreement with the canary populations democratic wishes.
Such an extreme action is not part of any liberal democratic agenda, anywhere in the world, it's arguably very damaging to the canary economy and people, the people have in no way given any sanction or approval to this nasty damaging act.
The they who have done this are individuals in the govt, several high ranking individuals , who appear to have responded to the request of the hotel lobby to try to protect hotel occupancy , regardless of the potential success of the policy or and greater damage that this policy may inflict on the the Canarian economy and people .
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
You are obviously fairly new to this thread , we have covered these arguments/ issues before , but clearly many new people do come along so things have to be re stated / re argued from time to time on here.
Spain is a country in transit from dictatorship to democracy, it's present democracy is a mere 28 years old , that follows a 36 year fascist dictatorship , an ally of hitler and Mussolini , the only fascist dictatorship in Europe to survive world war 2.
The they you describe are not at all the Canarian people who might agree with the govts policy on self catering holiday home renting, indeed nothing about the crackdown , the lack of prior warning, the massive fines, can be said to be fully in agreement with the canary populations democratic wishes.
Such an extreme action is not part of any liberal democratic agenda, anywhere in the world, it's arguably very damaging to the canary economy and people, the people have in no way given any sanction or approval to this nasty damaging act.
The they who have done this are individuals in the govt, several high ranking individuals , who appear to have responded to the request of the hotel lobby to try to protect hotel occupancy , regardless of the potential success of the policy or and greater damage that this policy may inflict on the the Canarian economy and people .
Nelson, I might be new to the thread, but I am certainly not new to Spanish democracy, politics, law, business, social issues or practices.
Please answer a simple question as a follow on from your last post; you knew about Spain's history, etc, before you bought your two apartments. So why did you invest?
Angusjim
19-05-2013, 11:59
You are obviously fairly new to this thread , we have covered these arguments/ issues before , but clearly many new people do come along so things have to be re stated / re argued from time to time on here.
Spain is a country in transit from dictatorship to democracy, it's present democracy is a mere 28 years old , that follows a 36 year fascist dictatorship , an ally of hitler and Mussolini , the only fascist dictatorship in Europe to survive world war 2.
The they you describe are not at all the Canarian people who might agree with the govts policy on self catering holiday home renting, indeed nothing about the crackdown , the lack of prior warning, the massive fines, can be said to be fully in agreement with the canary populations democratic wishes.
Such an extreme action is not part of any liberal democratic agenda, anywhere in the world, it's arguably very damaging to the canary economy and people, the people have in no way given any sanction or approval to this nasty damaging act.
The they who have done this are individuals in the govt, several high ranking individuals , who appear to have responded to the request of the hotel lobby to try to protect hotel occupancy , regardless of the potential success of the policy or and greater damage that this policy may inflict on the the Canarian economy and people .
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
You are obviously fairly new to this thread , we have covered these arguments/ issues before , but clearly many new people do come along so things have to be re stated / re argued from time to time on here.
Spain is a country in transit from dictatorship to democracy, it's present democracy is a mere 28 years old , that follows a 36 year fascist dictatorship , an ally of hitler and Mussolini , the only fascist dictatorship in Europe to survive world war 2.
The they you describe are not at all the Canarian people who might agree with the govts policy on self catering holiday home renting, indeed nothing about the crackdown , the lack of prior warning, the massive fines, can be said to be fully in agreement with the canary populations democratic wishes.
Such an extreme action is not part of any liberal democratic agenda, anywhere in the world, it's arguably very damaging to the canary economy and people, the people have in no way given any sanction or approval to this nasty damaging act.
The they who have done this are individuals in the govt, several high ranking individuals , who appear to have responded to the request of the hotel lobby to try to protect hotel occupancy , regardless of the potential success of the policy or and greater damage that this policy may inflict on the the Canarian economy and people .
Brilliant !! I have no idea what you are banging on about, but your post will undoutably get your fans ranting and raving:crylaughing:
leaving out mussolini and Hitler can we agree that all earnings from rental properties (longterm lets or short term lets) should be declared in the country that the property is located and the tax for this in the canary islands is:
24.75% for non residents.
7% IGIC on tourist rentals.
At least can we agree that? Hit thanks if you agree!
I owned an apartment for quite a few years on what is now considered an illegal ex tourist complex.
As it was my 2nd apartment I declared and paid all my taxes in Tenerife and what a faff that was submitting all details every 3 months.
The government gladly took my money even though if I had still got the apartment I could in theory have been fined for illegal letting - odd that isnt it.
No-one said to me then "oi thats illegal, better not take your money," not even my accountant in Los Cris who made a nice tidy sum out of me over the years, nor the lawyer who insisted the seller needed to accept a separate amount of money (15,000euro) over and above the price declared on the escritura so no pious talk from anyone on here please about the Canarian government being ripped off.
Oh and of course the "assumed lettings tax" I paid on both my properties every year. Then when I sold they held on to 3% of my proceeds for almost 18 months.
I think thats because they dont differentiate between long term lets and holiday lets on the tax office form so they wouldnt know you were doing something illegal even if they were interested!
Dont understand why you were paying tax on lets and the 'non letting tax' as well though.
Angusjim
19-05-2013, 12:20
Nelson, you invested into a business when the rules were already in place. Nobody forced you to do it. If you were misinformed, that is not the governments fault.
As Kiwiphil says, either get involved with the democratic process or admit you made the mistake and shut up. As per previous posts, you will have a window of opportunity to challenge the new rules soon.
At least it appears that you now (grudgingly) accept that you were liable to pay your taxes to Spanish authorities over the last ten years, if so that's a huge step for mankind!
What about somone like Red Devil that tried to do everything right and did not knowlingly commit any crime, but she potentially could be fined, her only crime is being misled at all stages by Tenerife's finest including the government who all had their noses in the money trough during the feeding frenzy.
I made the decision to buy a holiday home in the canaries after enjoying hotel holidays in Tenerife for many years and really loving the climate and scenery. A friend staying at the bitacora in 2003, spoke to me about a friend renting an apartment out and the income covering the mortgage and costs. I often read the Brit papers and viewed the for sale apartments with rental potential. In 2004 I was 40 and decided if we did not get on with it then it would be a case of regret later not doing so, we bought our apartment in spring 2004.
It never occurred to us that buying and renting out a holiday home in these tourist islands were anything other than a normal everyday activity. We had some knowledge of the 1995 laws, we made sure we bought touristic , but the 50 plus one stuff etc , well we were not up to speed with that.
These laws were ignored in 2004 , the hotels and resorts were full enough, the economy clearly needed all the tourist footfall to keep growth and forward momentum.
Only the crisis of 2007 started the misplaced protectionist actions of the canary govt.
What about somone like Red Devil that tried to do everything right and did not knowlingly commit any crime, but she potentially could be fined, her only crime is being misled at all stages by Tenerife's finest including the government who all had their noses in the money trough during the feeding frenzy.
Source please?
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
I made the decision to buy a holiday home in the canaries after enjoying hotel holidays in Tenerife for many years and really loving the climate and scenery. A friend staying at the bitacora in 2003, spoke to me about a friend renting an apartment out and the income covering the mortgage and costs. I often read the Brit papers and viewed the for sale apartments with rental potential. In 2004 I was 40 and decided if we did not get on with it then it would be a case of regret later not doing so, we bought our apartment in spring 2004.
It never occurred to us that buying and renting out a holiday home in these tourist islands were anything other than a normal everyday activity. We had some knowledge of the 1995 laws, we made sure we bought touristic , but the 50 plus one stuff etc , well we were not up to speed with that.
These laws were ignored in 2004 , the hotels and resorts were full enough, the economy clearly needed all the tourist footfall to keep growth and forward momentum.
Only the crisis of 2007 started the misplaced protectionist actions of the canary govt.
So you invested knowing that laws were in place. And now those laws are enforced and you got fined for ignoring them, it's everyone's fault but your own?
I made the decision to buy a holiday home in the canaries after enjoying hotel holidays in Tenerife for many years and really loving the climate and scenery. A friend staying at the bitacora in 2003, spoke to me about a friend renting an apartment out and the income covering the mortgage and costs. I often read the Brit papers and viewed the for sale apartments with rental potential. In 2004 I was 40 and decided if we did not get on with it then it would be a case of regret later not doing so, we bought our apartment in spring 2004.
It never occurred to us that buying and renting out a holiday home in these tourist islands were anything other than a normal everyday activity. We had some knowledge of the 1995 laws, we made sure we bought touristic , but the 50 plus one stuff etc , well we were not up to speed with that.
.
Good grief nelson, you are not even 50 yet - your tone is often more :old:
Good grief nelson, you are not even 50 yet - your tone is often more :old:
Ha ha, well it's often curious how we imagine each other on here from our postings. As you know some members often take me for a lady.
Ha ha, well it's often curious how we imagine each other on here from our postings. As you know some members often take me for a lady.
An OLD LADY at that lol.
Ha ha, well it's often curious how we imagine each other on here from our postings. As you know some members often take me for a lady.
what! but you are a right fanny
x
An OLD LADY at that lol.
As an "old lady" I resent the comparison but am truely grateful to Nelson who has caused us all hours of amusement,frustration,rage and more amusement.Image him in another 20 years!!!!!!
I think thats because they dont differentiate between long term lets and holiday lets on the tax office form so they wouldnt know you were doing something illegal even if they were interested!
Dont understand why you were paying tax on lets and the 'non letting tax' as well though.
I disagree ..... I paid income tax on my holiday rentals and collected and paid IGIC. I had some apartments on holiday lets and some on long lets. When completing my tax return my accountant had to differentiate between the two types of letting. On the holiday lets you are only allowed to declare expenses for the days booked. (EG if you had bookings for 200 days, your expenses would be divided by 365 and multiplied by 200.) So the accountant and hacienda were well aware that I was letting to holiday makers. But as in Red Devil's experience it was never pointed out that I was paying tax on illegal earnings!
I disagree ..... I paid income tax on my holiday rentals and collected and paid IGIC. I had some apartments on holiday lets and some on long lets. When completing my tax return my accountant had to differentiate between the two types of letting. On the holiday lets you are only allowed to declare expenses for the days booked. (EG if you had bookings for 200 days, your expenses would be divided by 365 and multiplied by 200.) So the accountant and hacienda were well aware that I was letting to holiday makers. But as in Red Devil's experience it was never pointed out that I was paying tax on illegal earnings!
Web did you sell / stop renting the tourist property?
I stopped renting in 2011.
I stopped renting in 2011.
Weird that you were paying IGIC on the property since it didn't start for owners until January 2013.
Red Devil
19-05-2013, 20:42
I think thats because they dont differentiate between long term lets and holiday lets on the tax office form so they wouldnt know you were doing something illegal even if they were interested!
Dont understand why you were paying tax on lets and the 'non letting tax' as well though.
I had to show the number of days it was unlet (or used privately) within the year and pay tax on income for when occupied and also non letting tax on empty days.
Weird that you were paying IGIC on the property since it didn't start for owners until January 2013.
Foz said she was doing returns for several apartments, so it was a business above the former IGIC threshold ?
essexeddie
19-05-2013, 21:23
I had to show the number of days it was unlet (or used privately) within the year and pay tax on income for when occupied and also non letting tax on empty days.
Thats correct.
.
Foz said she was doing returns for several apartments, so it was a business above the former IGIC threshold ?
Yeah that's all I could think of
I was amaized to hear from someone on our complex (residencial) they just bought an appartment at newyear and are renting out now and then .
Even saw advertisements from estate agents renting out per week on our complex .
And know of several renting out now and then since years .
You would think nothing is really happening , or peaple would be more carefull before buying untill this law is clear .
I was amaized to hear from someone on our complex (residencial) they just bought an appartment at newyear and are renting out now and then .
Even saw advertisements from estate agents renting out per week on our complex .
And know of several renting out now and then since years .
You would think nothing is really happening , or peaple would be more carefull before buying untill this law is clear .
The law is clear - it's only made unclear when irresponsible stories are bandied about the press .
jogger321
20-05-2013, 00:58
I was amaized to hear from someone on our complex (residencial) they just bought an appartment at newyear and are renting out now and then .
Even saw advertisements from estate agents renting out per week on our complex .
And know of several renting out now and then since years .
You would think nothing is really happening , or peaple would be more carefull before buying untill this law is clear .
There are people still advertising holiday lets openly on EBay on complexes such as Parque Santiago 1 & 2, Yucca Park, Tenerife Gardens, Chippeque, Dinastia to name a few. At the end of the day its their choice I guess.
bonitatime
20-05-2013, 08:44
I disagree ..... I paid income tax on my holiday rentals and collected and paid IGIC. I had some apartments on holiday lets and some on long lets. When completing my tax return my accountant had to differentiate between the two types of letting. On the holiday lets you are only allowed to declare expenses for the days booked. (EG if you had bookings for 200 days, your expenses would be divided by 365 and multiplied by 200.) So the accountant and hacienda were well aware that I was letting to holiday makers. But as in Red Devil's experience it was never pointed out that I was paying tax on illegal earnings!
Not sure what you are claiming here is criteria for the tax office to know as we have an apartment we long term let but cant claim for the months it isnt let. On your suposition we could be short term letting too
Not sure there has ever been a tax year where it has been let the whole 12 months.
What about somone like Red Devil that tried to do everything right and did not knowlingly commit any crime, but she potentially could be fined, her only crime is being misled at all stages by Tenerife's finest including the government who all had their noses in the money trough during the feeding frenzy.
What about if all owners had been honest like Red Devil. There would have been a substantial flow of tax revenue , so the government might have considered the sector as more responsible, and just implemented some minor rules (Nelson's annual licence, obligatory insurance, etc). Historically, the Spanish government have seldom cut off any major tax revenue sources by imposing new legislation.
The sector has unfortunately p****d on its chips, so to speak. Its very unfortunate for the likes of Red Devil, but those who have been paying their taxes can blame the tax evaders as much as the government for the current situation.
What about if all owners had been honest like Red Devil. There would have been a substantial flow of tax revenue , so the government might have considered the sector as more responsible, and just implemented some minor rules (Nelson's annual licence, obligatory insurance, etc). Historically, the Spanish government have seldom cut off any major tax revenue sources by imposing new legislation.
The sector has unfortunately p****d on its chips, so to speak. Its very unfortunate for the likes of Red Devil, but those who have been paying their taxes can blame the tax evaders as much as the government for the current situation.
I suggest, as I have before, there is much truth in this reality.
The Canaries are somewhat "behind" the progress that has taken place in much of Europe, perhaps partly as a result of being rather remote from it. As internet advertising for holiday lets began to grow at such a pace in recent years, I have no doubt that those in power began to see a reduction in bookings at hotels and apartments whilst at the same time saw traveller numbers at the airports steadily increase and when the crisis really hit home their eyes were opened.
It's not just down to taxation of course though. Issues of standards and the lack of control of them, together with other potential dangers such as validity of insurance policies would also have played a part in the Government's decisions to look to the law in an effort to bring below the counter letting under control.
As some have said, you really cannot blame the Government, nor does it have anything much to do with Hitler. The "overlord" agent rules were already enshrined in Canarian law and are now being acted upon in an effort to bring the situation under control.
I can see the day when, once under control the private letting "industry" will be seen to be another string to the tourist industry's bow and perhaps will be able to demonstrate the value(s) it could bring if it were established properly and brought into line, but that day is a very long way off for the moment.
Foz said she was doing returns for several apartments, so it was a business above the former IGIC threshold ?
That's correct Doreen x
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Not sure what you are claiming here is criteria for the tax office to know as we have an apartment we long term let but cant claim for the months it isnt let. On your suposition we could be short term letting too
Not sure there has ever been a tax year where it has been let the whole 12 months.
The very first question on the tax return relating to each individual property asks for the "type" of letting. Also, there have often been tax concessions for long lets that were not applied to apartments offering holiday lets. I'm just arguing that the tax office and accountants were made aware of the type of letting being carried out ... but did not advise owners that what they were doing was illegal.
That's correct Doreen x
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
The very first question on the tax return relating to each individual property asks for the "type" of letting. Also, there have often been tax concessions for long lets that were not applied to apartments offering holiday lets. I'm just arguing that the tax office and accountants were made aware of the type of letting being carried out ... but did not advise owners that what they were doing was illegal.
Foz, tax office staff are just that; they are neither judges or lawyers. It is not up to them to evaluate if an activity is legal or not, or to check if an owner is registered with Turismo.
Foz, tax office staff are just that; they are neither judges or lawyers. It is not up to them to evaluate if an activity is legal or not, or to check if an owner is registered with Turismo.
Fair enough.
Looking back over this thread there have been quite a few posts arguing that anyone who has in the past illegally let their apartment must have done so knowingly and deserves the fine they get. I find that very unfair to the many who have turned to various professionals for advice, willingly paid all their taxes etc and firmly believed they were not only doing nothing wrong, but were in fact offering a great service to their clients and doing so in a responsible and legal manner. The first I ever heard to the contrary was when this thread was launched ..... and I sincerely thank the forum for the education.
I will not say that I agree with the sole agent system adopted here, but this is where I live and prefer to abide by the laws of the land and sleep at night. I hope the time will come that the government opt for a more effective way of regulating the industry, but I rather suspect that will not be the case.
Fair enough.
Looking back over this thread there have been quite a few posts arguing that anyone who has in the past illegally let their apartment must have done so knowingly and deserves the fine they get. I find that very unfair to the many who have turned to various professionals for advice, willingly paid all their taxes etc and firmly believed they were not only doing nothing wrong, but were in fact offering a great service to their clients and doing so in a responsible and legal manner. The first I ever heard to the contrary was when this thread was launched ..... and I sincerely thank the forum for the education.
I will not say that I agree with the sole agent system adopted here, but this is where I live and prefer to abide by the laws of the land and sleep at night. I hope the time will come that the government opt for a more effective way of regulating the industry, but I rather suspect that will not be the case.
Totally fair enough - it's a shame the "professionals" let you down. The forum is a great source of info and we'd be poorer without it.
kiwiphil
20-05-2013, 23:21
I will not say that I agree with the sole agent system adopted here, but this is where I live and prefer to abide by the laws of the land and sleep at night. I hope the time will come that the government opt for a more effective way of regulating the industry, but I rather suspect that will not be the case.
Well said.
I think all those who are not abiding by the rules are making it quite unfair on those that do. If I was being affected in this manner I don't think I'd be quite so passive about those breaking the rules as everyone seems to be. I'd be wondering every time my apartment was empty whether that was because I was undercut by someone playing by their own rules. Not a very British way of thinking maybe, but I don't think cheating the system and effectively cheating your fellow apartment owners is either.
Red Devil
20-05-2013, 23:59
I suggest, as I have before, there is much truth in this reality.
The Canaries are somewhat "behind" the progress that has taken place in much of Europe, perhaps partly as a result of being rather remote from it. As internet advertising for holiday lets began to grow at such a pace in recent years, I have no doubt that those in power began to see a reduction in bookings at hotels and apartments whilst at the same time saw traveller numbers at the airports steadily increase and when the crisis really hit home their eyes were opened.
It's not just down to taxation of course though. Issues of standards and the lack of control of them, together with other potential dangers such as validity of insurance policies would also have played a part in the Government's decisions to look to the law in an effort to bring below the counter letting under control.
As some have said, you really cannot blame the Government, nor does it have anything much to do with Hitler. The "overlord" agent rules were already enshrined in Canarian law and are now being acted upon in an effort to bring the situation under control.
I can see the day when, once under control the private letting "industry" will be seen to be another string to the tourist industry's bow and perhaps will be able to demonstrate the value(s) it could bring if it were established properly and brought into line, but that day is a very long way off for the moment.
And lets not forget the Canarian government only began (after16 years) to look at the law when the hotel groups threw a tantrum.
It has been asked on here a few times who regulates the sole agents? Cant recall many answers. Dont forget the sole agents became necessary by law long after the apartments they were supposed to represent had been built.
It has been stated all along it was nothing to do with taxation but that hasnt stopped people on here banging on about their taxation theories and assumptions. And thats are they all are.
seanocelt
21-05-2013, 01:24
Appeal updates on JA's site/Facebook now.
Appeal updates on JA's site/Facebook now.
Some major news - quoting from Janet's website
First illegal lettings appeals reach Court
20 May 2013
The first appeals of fines issued under the Plan Especial went to Court last Thursday. Before the hearing, however, the judge called Alotca lawyer José Escobedo and the Government’s lawyer into a meeting. Also present were a legal assistant from Tenerife Litigation (the office of the two Alotca lawyers, José Escobedo and Santiago Saenz), and the two chief Turismo inspectors.
Before I talk about the meeting I would like to clarify two things that have been the subject of much discussion and rumour. First, the judge confirmed that Canarian law is valid, and applicable, to these cases of fines against individuals for private holiday rentals. Secondly, he confirmed that previous judgments concerning “prior authorization” have no relevance at all to them.
The judge requested the meeting because he had certain things to say in general terms about the specific cases being heard and others like them still to come to hearing. These were that he considered the fine amount to be disproportionate (as I’ve previously posted, proportionality of punishment is written into the Spanish constitution); that Alotca lawyers had prepared a strong and detailed defence; that the Government nonetheless had a case that could be developed during a hearing; that such cases would take a considerable time to hear; and there were so many of them that Court time would be inordinate. As a result, he had consulted with other judges and it had been decided that all cases would be heard by that same judge through the one Court, number 4 in Santa Cruz.
Having made these comments, the judge then asked that a class action be formed for an out of Court settlement which would apply to all the appeals underway at present. Since Alotca has the vast majority of cases to be heard, and was behind the first appeals to be heard, the class action is to be conducted through Alotca, with cases being handled by other lawyers forming part of the Alotca action. The settlement will require a document to be signed by the appellants acknowledging that they had been in error, that this error had resulted in a breach of the law, that they accept a fine as punishment, and, naturally, confirm that there will be no future breaches. The document will stand as a legal judgment so that even with an out of Court settlement, any future fines arising from continued letting would be at the second offence level of up to €30,000.
The Government has been given a month to liaise with José Escobedo and Santiago Saenz to negotiate the settlement, involving the final document to be signed and the level of the fine: the judge said that in his opinion, it would reasonably be in the region of €5,000. The Court provided José Escobedo with a list of all cases involving other lawyers, and any appellant with a non-Alotca lawyer who wishes to join the class action must instruct their lawyer urgently to contact Tenerife Litigation so that their cases can be presented to Court as part of that action. Those who are already with one of the two Alotca lawyers need do nothing.
There is a video recording of Thursday’s meeting which I watched this afternoon. I will have a copy uploaded onto my website as soon as it can be transposed into a file in a format that I can upload. I am dependent on the help of others to do this, so please bear with me.
José and Santiago ask that any enquiries come via me to free them up to get on with this work. Evidently they expect to hear directly from lawyers of those who have been fined and who are to join the class action. In terms of general questions, however, they ask people to email me. If anyone has just received a fine, or does so over the next few weeks, please also contact me urgently to find out what Alotca lawyers will need so that time is not wasted with them answering basic initial questions.
On a wider basis, Alotca is about to start negotiations with the OCU (organización de consumidores y usuarios), the Spanish Consumers Organization, which is preparing to fight the recently announced national proposals to limit tourist letting throughout Spain. The fight is very far from over, but with regard to the fines issued so far, we at last have clarity.
From Janet :
The first appeals of fines issued under the Plan Especial went to Court last Thursday. Before the hearing, however, the judge called Alotca lawyer José Escobedo and the Government’s lawyer into a meeting. Also present were a legal assistant from Tenerife Litigation (the office of the two Alotca lawyers, José Escobedo and Santiago Saenz), and the two chief Turismo inspectors.
Before I talk about the meeting I would like to clarify two things that have been the subject of much discussion and rumour. First, the judge confirmed that Canarian law is valid, and applicable, to these cases of fines against individuals for private holiday rentals. Secondly, he confirmed that previous judgments concerning “prior authorization” have no relevance at all to them.
The judge requested the meeting because he had certain things to say in general terms about the specific cases being heard and others like them still to come to hearing. These were that he considered the fine amount to be disproportionate (as I’ve previously posted, proportionality of punishment is written into the Spanish constitution); that Alotca lawyers had prepared a strong and detailed defence; that the Government nonetheless had a case that could be developed during a hearing; that such cases would take a considerable time to hear; and there were so many of them that Court time would be inordinate. As a result, he had consulted with other judges and it had been decided that all cases would be heard by that same judge through the one Court, number 4 in Santa Cruz.
Having made these comments, the judge then asked that a class action be formed for an out of Court settlement which would apply to all the appeals underway at present. Since Alotca has the vast majority of cases to be heard, and was behind the first appeals to be heard, the class action is to be conducted through Alotca, with cases being handled by other lawyers forming part of the Alotca action. The settlement will require a document to be signed by the appellants acknowledging that they had been in error, that this error had resulted in a breach of the law, that they accept a fine as punishment, and, naturally, confirm that there will be no future breaches. The document will stand as a legal judgment so that even with an out of Court settlement, any future fines arising from continued letting would be at the second offence level of up to €30,000.
The Government has been given a month to liaise with José Escobedo and Santiago Saenz to negotiate the settlement, involving the final document to be signed and the level of the fine: the judge said that in his opinion, it would reasonably be in the region of €5,000. The Court provided José Escobedo with a list of all cases involving other lawyers, and any appellant with a non-Alotca lawyer who wishes to join the class action must instruct their lawyer urgently to contact Tenerife Litigation so that their cases can be presented to Court as part of that action. Those who are already with one of the two Alotca lawyers need do nothing.
There is a video recording of Thursday’s meeting which I watched this afternoon. I will have a copy uploaded onto my website as soon as it can be transposed into a file in a format that I can upload. I am dependent on the help of others to do this, so please bear with me.
José and Santiago ask that any enquiries come via me to free them up to get on with this work. Evidently they expect to hear directly from lawyers of those who have been fined and who are to join the class action. In terms of general questions, however, they ask people to email me. If anyone has just received a fine, or does so over the next few weeks, please also contact me urgently to find out what Alotca lawyers will need so that time is not wasted with them answering basic initial questions.
On a wider basis, Alotca is about to start negotiations with the OCU (organización de consumidores y usuarios), the Spanish Consumers Organization, which is preparing to fight the recently announced national proposals to limit tourist letting throughout Spain. The fight is very far from over, but with regard to the fines issued so far, we at last have clarity.
I bet John the solicitor could teach that judge a thing or two.............................pfft
x
This is massive news, I wonder if the Canarian weekly and other publications will be giving this front page coverage like they have other "info" relating to this law ...
junglejim
21-05-2013, 09:07
So who blinked first ?
An interesting and welcome development with some progress , I´m surprised that an out of court settlement can be taken as precedent in law but then again this is the Canaries !
I assume this "Class Action" agreement has to be ratified by the individuals who have been fined - on a vote ?
It remains to be seen now how the new law develops and how it will be applied in terms of fines etc. , maybe another coupleof months before it is issued?
Very interesting !
Some interesting points that:
Judge confirmed Canarian law is valid.
The "prior authorization" aspect has no relevance to these cases.
The judge considered the fines excessive and suggested 5000 instead of the 18,000.
Future infractions of 30,000 for reoffenders.
Anyone accepting the class action would have to accept why they did was wrong (might be hard for some to sign that!).
So who blinked first ?
An interesting and welcome development with some progress , I´m surprised that an out of court settlement can be taken as precedent in law but then again this is the Canaries !
I assume this "Class Action" agreement has to be ratified by the individuals who have been fined - on a vote ?
It remains to be seen now how the new law develops and how it will be applied in terms of fines etc. , maybe another coupleof months before it is issued?
The new law finished the first stage yesterday
http://www.diariodeavisos.com/nueva-ley-turistica-solo-da-cabida-hoteles-cinco-estrellas/
They seem more concerned with the moratorium and whether 4 star hotels can now be built.
Altamira
21-05-2013, 09:58
Class Action I think the class action is the most cost effective way for all parties concerned. I am sure some heroic individual will wish to fight their own case, but they should be aware that the final costs may far exceed what they can afford. On a separate point where do the independent agents fit into this class action scenario?
Looking at the Boletin for the last few days, some interesting items:
Four fines for Tourist Guides from 3,000 to 9,000
60,000 fine for company managing Tenerife Sun complex in Golf del Sur
Declaration for one lucky owner in Parque Santiago 1 that the file is closed due to being out of time
Fine of 15,000 for an owner of two apartments in Altamira http://www.gobiernodecanarias.org/boc/2013/095/011.html
Fine of 9,000 for an owner in Gran Canaria
Peterrayner
21-05-2013, 12:22
The judge considered the fines excessive and suggested 5000 with a suspended sentence against future infractions of 30,000.
John
are you reading it that the initial 5000E fine would be "suspended" but any further infractions would be levied at 30,000E ??
If that's the case then that would seem to be a very reasonable judgment and I would imagine an acceptable outcome for most.
John
are you reading it that the initial 5000E fine would be "suspended" but any further infractions would be levied at 30,000E ??
If that's the case then that would seem to be a very reasonable judgment and I would imagine an acceptable outcome for most.
no i was reading : 5000 fine now and if you do it again its 30,000 - sorry i worded it badly
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Very interesting !
Some interesting points that:
Judge confirmed Canarian law is valid.
The "prior authorization" aspect has no relevance to these cases.
The judge considered the fines excessive and suggested 5000 instead of the 18,000.
Future infractions of 30,000 for reoffenders.
Anyone accepting the class action would have to accept why they did was wrong (might be hard for some to sign that!).
I've rephrased it to avoid confusion
Nelson will be along soon to explain to us how the Canarian judges have got this totally wrong and Franco would be proud of them !!!
As Janet pointed out on the radio this morning, the same Judge in the same court who has proposed the "class action" out of court settlement would be the one who will hear cases from individuals who may choose not to sign up to the compromise and attempt to make a stand on their own.
Frankly, I wouldn't fancy their chances, particularly if you add on the fees for Court time.
Still, from Nellie's point of view 5 grand for each offence is a much better deal than he had at first until of course somebody mentions the back-tax!
Does anyone know how things will proceed for apartment owners who have sold prior to their fine being applied? I know of three apartments in our complex where the owners have sold and have no assets remaining in Tenerife.
Does anyone know how things will proceed for apartment owners who have sold prior to their fine being applied? I know of three apartments in our complex where the owners have sold and have no assets remaining in Tenerife.
Notifications are sent out by the courts. If the owner does not reply to the court within the time stated on the notification, the court will pass judgment in absence. If the owner cannot be contacted within 4 years of the judgement, it will be "filed" as not payable.
Nelson what's your thoughts on these developments ???? Where will you go now, all the way to europe or pay?
delderek
21-05-2013, 18:28
I would think this proposal is very fair. Fined at 18000. Admit your guilt out of court pay around 5000: Promise not to repeat the offence. A damn good compromise I would think. But if you don't agree you can still go the whole legal route if you want, if you have more money than sense.
Agreed Del its a good all round compromise;
the inspectors and the government won't have done their work in vain.
the owners who knew the law and broke it will have had a hard enough rap on the knuckles not to do it again.
The owners who had no idea about the law will probably be able to stomach the fine at 5000.
The legal accommodation industry can see that action has been taken against the illegal letting block.
boredinscotland
21-05-2013, 19:38
Does anyone know how things will proceed for apartment owners who have sold prior to their fine being applied? I know of three apartments in our complex where the owners have sold and have no assets remaining in Tenerife.
In same boat as me, sold up but still got my car registered to me in Tenerife
UPDATE ON TOURIST RENTAL LAWS - THE FACTS!
Given the vitriol, bile and self-serving rubbish spouted by a regrettable minority of members on this forum, I do not propose to enter into ongoing correspondence or debate on this issue via the forum. However, if anyone wishes to discuss the following issues in a civilized manner, they are welcome to contact me via email or our website.
Janet ********'s website (plus a handful of 'bar room experts' on this forum) have boldly announced that the article I wrote in the local press was incorrect or an 'advertorial'. Please now allow me (a qualified lawyer regulated in both Spain and England with 3 million Euros professional indemnity insurance) to set the facts straight.
I have now obtained copies of the Judgments from the TSJC (High Court of the Canary Islands), which is the highest court in the archipelago, whose decisions affect Tenerife. Those Judgments are:
1. 23rd December 2011 - Appeal by ‘Teide 10 S.L.’ (223/2010)
2. 22nd December 2011 Appeal by ‘The Assoc of Tenerife Professional Tourist Guides of Tenerife’ & others (ref: 363/2010),
3. 8th May 2012, Appeal by Surfing Club Aguila Playa S.L. (91/2011).
Copies of the Judgments are available from our office on request by email (free of charge).
CONTINUED IN SEPARATE POST BELOW DUE TO SIZE OF ARTICLE.................
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
CONTINUED FROM ABOVE..........
In the 1st and 3rd case, the parties were appealing against fines issued to them by the tourist board for allegedly failing to comply with the licence requirements under the Law of 7/1995. In the 2nd case, the parties were challenging provisions of a new decree introduced in 2010 which specifically affected their industry (tour guides). That decree operated in conjunction with the controversial tourism exploitation law 7/1995.
In cases 1 and 3, the Judge expressly criticised the requirements to obtain a rental licence as set out in the 7/1995 law, describing those requirements as both disproportionate and in breach of the Bolkestein Directive under European Law.
In case 2, the key provisions of the said decree were ruled to be illegal, whilst in cases 1 and 3, the Judge threw out the denuncias and cancelled the associated fines issued by the tourist board.
In case 2, the Judge helpfully defined the scope of the 2006 Bolkestein Directive (Directive 2006/123/EC), namely that it applies to all tourist services in the Canary Islands, including tourist accommodation, travel agents, tour guides and recreational services. He commented that the Directive required all European member states to revise and modify their existing laws so as to simplify the administrative process and assist in the creation of new businesses and employment. Unsurprisingly, the Canarian Government thumbed their nose at this directive when the 7/1995 law was updated by the law of 14/2009.
The Judge went on to expressly state that the existing tourism laws (namely Law 7/1995 which was amended by Law 14/2009) regulating administrative licences to trade were incompatible with the Bolkestein Directive, whilst expressly criticising the 7/1995 law as being disproportionate. The Judge also highlighted the rather obvious fact that obtaining a licence in advance of trading provides no reassurance as to ongoing standards and that ongoing monitoring and supervision of rental establishments is the only effective solution.
For clarification, the licences referred to are those required specifically to rent properties to tourists. There is NO reference in the Judgment to any other type of upfront licence to trade that a business might require (e.g. Town Hall Opening Licences)
The said Judgments also make it clear that the rulings do not only affect tour guides or holiday companies, as suggested by some parties, but in fact affect all parties involved in tourist activities. Indeed, let's consider a fairly obvious point. The 7/1995 law (as amended by 14/2009) applies to all parties wishing to rent to tourists in the Canaries. Bolkestein is obviously intended to regulate that exact type of law. So how on earth could Bolkestein be interpreted to cover only certain categories of renter when the Canarian law covers all parties?? How on earth could anybody explain or justify that level of 'cherry-picking'?
Plus, even if mine and the Judges' analyses were somehow wrong and Bolkestein does only apply to businesses, then owners can obviously now go ahead and rent their properties through one of the dozens of independent rental agents in Tenerife (who are BUSINESSES), even if such owners don't have the confidence to put their own private adverts and websites back up just yet.
For anyone who still isn't quite ready to take my word for it, the subject has also been widely published in the Canarian press, which not a single person on this forum appears to have picked upon, despite Google bringing up both of the follow articles when the relevant keywords are entered:
From La Opinion (8th February 2013):
http://www.laopinion.es/canarias/2013/02/08/canarias-nueva-turistica-legalizara-150000-camas/458671.html
From La Provincia (9th February 2013):
http://www.laprovincia.es/canarias/2013/02/09/tribunales-tumban-autorizacion-previa-alojamientos-turisticos/513421.html
It should also be noted that the newly proposed law entitled “Ley de Renovación y Modernización Turística de Canarias” has been formulated in direct response to the above court rulings, a conclusion which is also reached by the writer of the article in La Opinion above. Indeed, if all the Judges are wrong and the 7/1995 law is somehow unaffected by Bolkestein, why is the Canarian Government now rushing to change it? They have buried their heads in the sand and ignored the overwhelming criticism of the 7/1995 Law for almost 16 years. It seems that High Court rulings have a wonderful way of focusing the government’s attention.
Further clarification is being sought on the rather vague information available as to how the proposed new law will work or when it will be introduced. The timetable for implementation of the new law can be found here:
http://www.parcan.es/iniciativa.py?numero=8L/PL-0006
However, we anticipate that further clarification will be published in April, following which we will write a further article with more information.
Meanwhile, until such new law is introduced, the obvious analysis of the legal situation is that any owner or agent wishing to rent their property on a tourist complex is not legally obliged to use the sole exploitation agent nor to obtain any specific tourist rental licence in advance and may now proceed to rent their property privately or through an independent agent. However, if owners wish to play it safe, they should stick to renting through a 'business', namely any independent rental agent'.
For further clarification, a complex is designated as ‘touristic’ if it is specified as such in the complex’s own community rules/statutes. Whether the complex has obtained a ‘licence’ to rent to tourists is irrelevant to its legal status as being either ‘touristic’ or ‘residential’.
In the meantime, anyone who receives an inspection demand or a denuncia fine should send the inspectors packing and immediately instruct a firm of solicitors (not necessarily mine) who will represent them for no more than €2.500 - €3.000 euros (a fair fee for the work involved) and who actually fights for their clients and does not simply advise them to pay up or haggle the fine.
I trust that this clears up the confusion over the issue. Meanwhile, I shall make no comment as to the apparent errors and inconsistencies in the 'legal opinion' apparently tendered by others. Suffice it to say, if any other 'lawyer' wishes to comment further, I'm sure they can come on the forum and give up their 'free time' to set out their response, just as I have done.
Conclusion: Let's put this ridiculous 'sole agency' law to bed once and for all, so that agents and property owners can live their lives and operate their businesses without fear and help to make Tenerife the booming success that we all know it can be!
blinkin heck John you don't half tell a good Jackanory
thanks for coming
x
However, we anticipate that further clarification will be published in April, following which we will write a further article with more information
.... should be interesting :)
boredinscotland
21-05-2013, 22:16
Is this the same Tenerife Solicitors that were acting for buyer of my apartment,,, Skandi woman phoned me and told me I would sign at Notary and get paid 'later' to be honest they are last people I would deal with and once Skandi woman was finished talking she got told straight that she is dreaming if she thought I would do that. Make your own minds up about them but bargepole comes to my mind
Time I think to start a new thread along the lines of "The New (2013) Law on Apartment Lettings".
The existing thread has run it's course and most Canarian Islands Apartments owners I am sure would now be interested in a Layman's" simple explanation (as far as this is possible) of what the new Law means to anyone considering Letting out an Apartment they own on either a long or short term basis.
A simple explanation please from some knowlegeable "independant" person on what the new "Legal" position is regarding someone wanting to Rent out an Apartment on a "Touristic" complex (ie. Must all short term lettings continue to go through a 'Sole' Lettings Agent on Site).
Assuning of course that short term Lettings on a Residential Site still remain totally Illegal.
Time for the Facts to be made clear once and for all - or is that asking for too much at this stage?.
certainly an interesting development. Fine reduction was always said to be a likely outcome. personally I still think that the whole 1995 law is protectionist and anti competitive. It completely destroys any concept of free consumer choice of holiday accomodation type. I personally think that it can never stand up to scrutiny in terms of EU consumer law/harmony etc.
This may mean many people see this as an easy and cheap way out, thats fair enough and you cant blame them for taking that view given their stress and worry since this began.
However an end to the holiday home renting market in the canaries will be a massive blow to the islands economy, if people take the judges deal and pay a bit of money today thats them off the hook, but the canary economy and people will suffer this because of this decision in the years ahead.
It also sets a precedent for the fines for residents in touristics under the new law. 30000 euro being too high, but perhaps 3000 euro for first offence being reasonable.
nelson the Judge checked and has said this Law is legal, hope that answers your question about the EU consumer law/harmony etc
So you can either take the Judges word for it or that of John the Solicitor
certainly an interesting development. Fine reduction was always said to be a likely outcome. personally I still think that the whole 1995 law is protectionist and anti competitive. It completely destroys any concept of free consumer choice of holiday accomodation type. I personally think that it can never stand up to scrutiny in terms of EU consumer law/harmony etc.
This may mean many people see this as an easy and cheap way out, thats fair enough and you cant blame them for taking that view given their stress and worry since this began.
The choice is now yours it seems - instruct your Lawyer to contact Snr Escobedo for that "cheap way out" or give Snr Hatrick a chance to prove his worth
In the meantime, anyone who receives an inspection demand or a denuncia fine should send the inspectors packing and immediately instruct a firm of solicitors (not necessarily mine) who will represent them for no more than €2.500 - €3.000 euros (a fair fee for the work involved) and who actually fights for their clients and does not simply advise them to pay up or haggle the fine
boredinscotland
21-05-2013, 23:24
5 grand fine or 2500-3000,,,, no brainer that one,, what happens if John looses? keep us posted Nelson
Time I think to start a new thread along the lines of "The New (2013) Law on Apartment Lettings".
The existing thread has run it's course and most Canarian Islands Apartments owners I am sure would now be interested in a Layman's" simple explanation (as far as this is possible) of what the new Law means to anyone considering Letting out an Apartment they own on either a long or short term basis.
A simple explanation please from some knowlegeable "independant" person on what the new "Legal" position is regarding someone wanting to Rent out an Apartment on a "Touristic" complex (ie. Must all short term lettings continue to go through a 'Sole' Lettings Agent on Site).
Assuning of course that short term Lettings on a Residential Site still remain totally Illegal.
Time for the Facts to be made clear once and for all - or is that asking for too much at this stage?.
Why? The law hasn't changed .
The law has always been (since 95).... Apartment used for tourism have to be on a tourist complex with a sole agent and registered with tourist board via that agent.
Any properties on complexes that are not touristic cannot let.
Simples
Time I think to start a new thread along the lines of "The New (2013) Law on Apartment Lettings".
The existing thread has run it's course and most Canarian Islands Apartments owners I am sure would now be interested in a Layman's" simple explanation (as far as this is possible) of what the new Law means to anyone considering Letting out an Apartment they own on either a long or short term basis.
A simple explanation please from some knowlegeable "independant" person on what the new "Legal" position is regarding someone wanting to Rent out an Apartment on a "Touristic" complex (ie. Must all short term lettings continue to go through a 'Sole' Lettings Agent on Site).
Assuning of course that short term Lettings on a Residential Site still remain totally Illegal.
Time for the Facts to be made clear once and for all - or is that asking for too much at this stage?.
If you listen to Janet's interview in full you will hear that she touched on the new law as it is currently being discussed in parliament. As she said, there would seem to be no plans whatsoever at this stage to bring in any legalisation of the private letting situation. Sole agents stay, and no licensing system for individual owners is in the offing. There is some light, perhaps, for owners of villas, but again this is likely to be complicated, controversial and certainly not swift.
TFS who seem to claim that the new legislation was brought about in light of the previous (and irrelevant) court cases and the new laws were being drafted on the back of the rulings in those, unconnected, cases, couldn't be further from the truth it would seem.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
certainly an interesting development. Fine reduction was always said to be a likely outcome. personally I still think that the whole 1995 law is protectionist and anti competitive. It completely destroys any concept of free consumer choice of holiday accomodation type. I personally think that it can never stand up to scrutiny in terms of EU consumer law/harmony etc.
This may mean many people see this as an easy and cheap way out, thats fair enough and you cant blame them for taking that view given their stress and worry since this began.
However an end to the holiday home renting market in the canaries will be a massive blow to the islands economy, if people take the judges deal and pay a bit of money today thats them off the hook, but the canary economy and people will suffer this because of this decision in the years ahead.
It also sets a precedent for the fines for residents in touristics under the new law. 30000 euro being too high, but perhaps 3000 euro for first offence being reasonable.
I think "inevitable" development would have been a better choice of wording. In my opinion the only reason the Judge concerned has suggested some form of compromise be reached is because he has been made well aware of the mis-selling by agents in recent years. You of course, assuming you opt for the compromise, will be getting away very lightly considering your previous admissions of knowing about the law.
It wouldn't surprise me if the Judge were to recommend that Agents and other "professionals" be held liable in the future and recommend the Government include legislation by which they would be accountable in the future.
Any plans??
seanocelt
22-05-2013, 02:13
Time I think to start a new thread along the lines of "The New (2013) Law on Apartment Lettings".
The existing thread has run it's course and most Canarian Islands Apartments owners I am sure would now be interested in a Layman's" simple explanation (as far as this is possible) of what the new Law means to anyone considering Letting out an Apartment they own on either a long or short term basis.
A simple explanation please from some knowlegeable "independant" person on what the new "Legal" position is regarding someone wanting to Rent out an Apartment on a "Touristic" complex (ie. Must all short term lettings continue to go through a 'Sole' Lettings Agent on Site).
Assuning of course that short term Lettings on a Residential Site still remain totally Illegal.
Time for the Facts to be made clear once and for all - or is that asking for too much at this stage?.
But..............there IS NOT a new law YET. This thread has not ran it's course. And Nelson CANNOT start telling/DICTATING that fines go down by ANOTHER 2 grand because he "thinks" its appropriate! And i just broke my silence twice in 24 hrs. So, I'm off again................................... Never has my signature been more apt. (AND 9PLUS i agree totally with you quoting the "solicitor's" post, i got poo-poohed for daring to object before. )
Angusjim
22-05-2013, 07:07
So where am I going to get an apartment that meets what we like all the ones we have used appear to be "illegal" unless Nelson can get this law sorted out. So looking for a good quality 1 bedroom apartment with large terrace that gets all day sun in good quality complex must have UK TV for Mrs B any ideas?:tiphat:
But..............there IS NOT a new law YET. This thread has not ran it's course. And Nelson CANNOT start telling/DICTATING that fines go down by ANOTHER 2 grand because he "thinks" its appropriate! And i just broke my silence twice in 24 hrs. So, I'm off again................................... Never has my signature been more apt. (AND 9PLUS i agree totally with you quoting the "solicitor's" post, i got poo-poohed for daring to object before. )
You can be as cócky as you like as long as you know exactly what you're talking about. Tenerife Solicitors must now apologize publicly to Janet ********, to forum members and the Tenerife public in general for their ineptness and clumsy professional advice.
I'm saying they should start off by doing N.I.E numbers for people instead of giving advice in areas they clearly do not understand, so as not to look like a cowboy outfit.
junglejim
22-05-2013, 08:00
So where am I going to get an apartment that meets what we like all the ones we have used appear to be "illegal" unless Nelson can get this law sorted out. So looking for a good quality 1 bedroom apartment with large terrace that gets all day sun in good quality complex must have UK TV for Mrs B any ideas?:tiphat:
You´ll just have to bite the bullet and make some "Friends " AJ! C´mon it´s not as bad as it looks - "Friends" are good !"
Angusjim
22-05-2013, 08:31
Cheers mate :wink:
certainly an interesting development. Fine reduction was always said to be a likely outcome. personally I still think that the whole 1995 law is protectionist and anti competitive. It completely destroys any concept of free consumer choice of holiday accomodation type. I personally think that it can never stand up to scrutiny in terms of EU consumer law/harmony etc.
This may mean many people see this as an easy and cheap way out, thats fair enough and you cant blame them for taking that view given their stress and worry since this began.
However an end to the holiday home renting market in the canaries will be a massive blow to the islands economy, if people take the judges deal and pay a bit of money today thats them off the hook, but the canary economy and people will suffer this because of this decision in the years ahead.
It also sets a precedent for the fines for residents in touristics under the new law. 30000 euro being too high, but perhaps 3000 euro for first offence being reasonable.
Sorry I only meant to quote Nelson's last couple of sentences where he mentions residents in touristic complexes. Does anyone have any further information on this. There are many people on our complex who either live permanently in their apartment or who never rent out their place. I was told by a lawyer that no owner would or could be forced to rent out their apartment via the sole agent if they do not wish to do so. Is that still the case?
boredinscotland
22-05-2013, 09:41
You can be as cócky as you like as long as you know exactly what you're talking about. Tenerife Solicitors must now apologize publicly to Janet ********, to forum members and the Tenerife public in general for their ineptness and clumsy professional advice.
I'm saying they should start off by doing N.I.E numbers for people instead of giving advice in areas they clearly do not understand, so as not to look like a cowboy outfit.
Agree 9+,,, it not worth thinking about if someone stupid would have believed this Skandi woman if they would have thought this is the 'Tenerife' way of selling your place,,,, no wonder Tenerife gets a bad name with chancers,,, I should have asked her when 'after' is?
Sorry I only meant to quote Nelson's last couple of sentences where he mentions residents in touristic complexes. Does anyone have any further information on this. There are many people on our complex who either live permanently in their apartment or who never rent out their place. I was told by a lawyer that no owner would or could be forced to rent out their apartment via the sole agent if they do not wish to do so. Is that still the case?
No one can force you to rent it via the sole agent - but if you choose to not do that then you cannot legally let your apartment .
No one can force you to rent it via the sole agent - but if you choose to not do that then you cannot legally let your apartment .
I think Foz is more concerned with the reports that you could not be a permanent resident on a touristic complex. We are still waiting to see the full text after amendments to be sure of their intentions.
Angusjim
22-05-2013, 09:48
No one can force you to rent it via the sole agent - but if you choose to not do that then you cannot legally let your apartment .
I know this has probably been asked before but would they have to pay their share of any improvements required in the complex to meet touristic requirements when they have no intention of doing holiday lets
You can be as cócky as you like as long as you know exactly what you're talking about. Tenerife Solicitors must now apologize publicly to Janet ********, to forum members and the Tenerife public in general for their ineptness and clumsy professional advice.
I'm saying they should start off by doing N.I.E numbers for people instead of giving advice in areas they clearly do not understand, so as not to look like a cowboy outfit.
They'll just blame Mussolini and Franco. They've had enough time to learn damage control methods from Nelson by now.:snore:
But seriously, publishing and advising their clients with inaccurate information as fact (as opposed to their own interpretations which should be clearly stated as their opinion) could open the doors for them to start getting some use from their 3 million insurance policy.
They'll just blame Mussolini and Franco. They've had enough time to learn damage control methods from Nelson by now.:snore:
But seriously, publishing and advising their clients with inaccurate information as fact (as opposed to their own interpretations which should be clearly stated as their opinion) could open the doors for them to start getting some use from their 3 million insurance policy.
I Concur..
I know this has probably been asked before but would they have to pay their share of any improvements required in the complex to meet touristic requirements when they have no intention of doing holiday lets
Yes of course - the same as the ones who let have to pay for things that residents might want.
Angusjim
22-05-2013, 10:18
Well only time will tell if this a good thing but one reason why we come back to Tenerife year after year was the fact that we got the type of accomodation that we wanted to book every time not what you get allocated by someone else.
But hopefully I will be proved wrong and we can book aparments that meet our requirements otherwise Tenerife will be just another option to us instead of our much preferred destination
Looking for Tenerife accommodation? Check out Paloma Beach Apartments - the number 1 self catering apartments in Los Cristianos*
Need advice or want to search for Tenerife Property ? The Tenerife Property Video Blog is your guide.
*as per Tripadvisor and Trivago review rankings.
Have a look there Jim.
I think Foz is more concerned with the reports that you could not be a permanent resident on a touristic complex. We are still waiting to see the full text after amendments to be sure of their intentions.
I hope this wont happen and i doubt it will happen
Angusjim
22-05-2013, 10:24
Have a look there Jim.
I am and John has very kindly said he will let me know ASAP:pray:
Quote Originally Posted by doreen
I think Foz is more concerned with the reports that you could not be a permanent resident on a touristic complex. We are still waiting to see the full text after amendments to be sure of their intentions.
I hope this wont happen and i doubt it will happen
I also can't see it happening, but it makes perfect sense.
I think Foz is more concerned with the reports that you could not be a permanent resident on a touristic complex. We are still waiting to see the full text after amendments to be sure of their intentions.
Doreen, there is a clear division within EU legislation which distinguish between rules which do and do not affect human rights. The Ley Horizontal which was implemented in the Valencia CA was overturned by this EU ruling because it compromised human rights (it affected the dwellings of EU citizens). It is very doubtful if any owners who wish to live in their own homes, on a tourist complex or not, will be affected.
Doreen, there is a clear division within EU legislation which distinguish between rules which do and do not affect human rights. The Ley Horizontal which was implemented in the Valencia CA was overturned by this EU ruling because it compromised human rights (it affected the dwellings of EU citizens). It is very doubtful if any owners who wish to live in their own homes, on a tourist complex or not, will be affected.
My advice from the alotca lawyers was quite unequivocal on the point of residing in a Touristic Complex inasmuch as it would not be possible for the Government to stop anyone living in their own apartment. Apart from this breaching european law I think it would really hit the fan if people who had lived in a complex for years were all of a sudden told to leave!!
But they could stop long lets for residents yeah ? (meaning a touristic complex could have two types of people staying there, Owners and tourists)
or would it be there owners, long lets and tourists?
Altamira
22-05-2013, 11:21
My advice from the alotca lawyers was quite unequivocal on the point of residing in a Touristic Complex inasmuch as it would not be possible for the Government to stop anyone living in their own apartment. Apart from this breaching european law I think it would really hit the fan if people who had lived in a complex for years were all of a sudden told to leave!!
Legal Advice During March this year at the Altamira AGM, we were advised by the Altamira Lawyer that neither the existing or proposed new laws could stop tourist apartment owners from using their apartments for residential purposes. So from that it seems that these owners have nothing to worry about, however it would be helpful if the proposed new tourist laws spell this out clearly.
But they could stop long lets for residents yeah ? (meaning a touristic complex could have two types of people staying there, Owners and tourists)
or would it be there owners, long lets and tourists?
I think the draft law refers to stopping the 'residentialisation' of tourist areas and I took this to mean that they do intend to prevent long term lets in touristic complexes - but who knows until it comes out!!
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Legal Advice During March this year at the Altamira AGM, we were advised by the Altamira Lawyer that neither the existing or proposed new laws could stop tourist apartment owners from using their apartments for residential purposes. So from that it seems that these owners have nothing to worry about, however it would be helpful if the proposed new tourist laws spell this out clearly.
I agree totally and think this is one thing that owners do not need to worry about.
I think the draft law refers to stopping the 'residentialisation' of tourist areas and I took this to mean that they do intend to prevent long term lets in touristic complexes - but who knows until it comes out!!
.
It is worth remembering that very few proposed laws make it to actual legislation in entire original form. There will be a window of opportunity for anyone who disagrees with any part of the proposed law to appeal against its implementation, and you can be sure that numerous associations and pressure groups (both Spanish and foreign) will be alert and ready to act as and when required.
I strongly advise any apartment owners who are worried about their investments to seek out and join such an association now, before the proposal is published.
Altamira
23-05-2013, 10:18
It is worth remembering that very few proposed laws make it to actual legislation in entire original form. There will be a window of opportunity for anyone who disagrees with any part of the proposed law to appeal against its implementation, and you can be sure that numerous associations and pressure groups (both Spanish and foreign) will be alert and ready to act as and when required.
I strongly advise any apartment owners who are worried about their investments to seek out and join such an association now, before the proposal is published.
Association I am sure there are many owners who are concerned about their Tenerife apartment investments. Many buyers purchased before the 1995 tourist law and many others were probably mislead by estate agents etc. into believing that it was ok to independently operate tourist rentals. If there had been an owners association prior to 1995, then this whole sorry state of affairs may have been avoided. Are you recommending any particular association?
Peterrayner
23-05-2013, 11:09
Association I am sure there are many owners who are concerned about their Tenerife apartment investments. Many buyers purchased before the 1995 tourist law and many others were probably mislead by estate agents etc. into believing that it was ok to independently operate tourist rentals. If there had been an owners association prior to 1995, then this whole sorry state of affairs may have been avoided. Are you recommending any particular association?
There was a very active association called Ciudadanos Europeos and they made many attempts to lobby for change or to revoke the 1995/7 law, all the way the the EU High Court, sadly without success.
There was a very active association called Ciudadanos Europeos and they made many attempts to lobby for change or to revoke the 1995/7 law, all the way the the EU High Court, sadly without success.
If you log onto their Website (c-euro.org) now, all you get is picture of some wood panelling (presumeably meant to be a closed door). They used to hold regular seminars in Los Cristianos with guest speakers (eg. The British Consul, or people advising you of your Pension entitlements here, etc.), and their website contained some very useful information. Shame that they seem to no longer exist in the Canary Isles.
I'm surprised tonym didn't say anything when he was reading this thread 2 nights ago as he was quite vocal before the judges confirmation of the Law.
I'm surprised tonym didn't say anything when he was reading this thread 2 nights ago as he was quite vocal before the judges confirmation of the Law.
What actually surprised me was that the judge had heard people muttering about "prior authorisation" and all that and felt it necessary to specifically say it was not relevant - thought such discussion was confined to the ex-pat community.
There was a very active association called Ciudadanos Europeos and they made many attempts to lobby for change or to revoke the 1995/7 law, all the way the the EU High Court, sadly without success.
I believe this association is now being run from Mallorca by Kate Mensink. They are really hot on lobbying central government for national voting rights for EU citizens, but they also have other projects. I'll try to find out more.
It is probable that any associations would be national, as this issue is not just relevant to the Canaries. I don't know of any such associations first hand (except for the one in Mallorca), so some groundwork may be required on some of the Spanish forums, or perhaps the lawyers connected to Janet A might have a contact.
yes this particular judge has taken a view on that point, he has made his suggestion on a settlement and at the same time stated his opinion on the relevance of the bolkestein issue.
Remember though , others may take a different view and what this judge says can be challenged by higher courts right up to the euro courts. Bolkestein did not exist in 1995 and we have heard some say the canaries ammended their law in 2009 to be compatible with BD , others say they have not.
This particular judge is proposing a quick settlement of the issue and equally quick revenues for the canary govt. There appears to be no indication in his remarks as reported , that he has taken a different line with touristic owners as compares with residential renters. The John Hatrick reports clearly stated that the touristic renters were protected by BD but not the residentials. A touristic renter in my view is not as far wide of the law as a residential renter, so logically should not have to pay as large a fine as a residential renter.
Perhaps the alotca lawyers are going to bring that up with the govt in their discussions about the final settlement, maybe two seperate class actions are going to be required , one for touristic renters and another for residential renters?
yes this particular judge has taken a view on that point, he has made his suggestion on a settlement and at the same time stated his opinion on the relevance of the bolkestein issue.
Remember though , others may take a different view and what this judge says can be challenged by higher courts right up to the euro courts. Bolkestein did not exist in 1995 and we have heard some say the canaries ammended their law in 2009 to be compatible with BD , others say they have not.
It will be interesting to listen to the judge's words when Janet is able to upload the recording to her site. From what she told us, it was discussed amongst the various judges and they have picked out one person to deal with all the cases. The fact that this judge saw fit to mention the validity of Canarian Law and the irrelevance of the "prior authorisation" cases relating to fines from 2008 and earlier does appear to indicate a rather full discussion took place before he made his remarks.
Altamira
23-05-2013, 15:29
I believe this association is now being run from Mallorca by Kate Mensink. They are really hot on lobbying central government for national voting rights for EU citizens, but they also have other projects. I'll try to find out more.
It is probable that any associations would be national, as this issue is not just relevant to the Canaries. I don't know of any such associations first hand (except for the one in Mallorca), so some groundwork may be required on some of the Spanish forums, or perhaps the lawyers connected to Janet A might have a contact.
Association/Forum Perhaps something like ALOTCA is ideally placed to represent the interests of property owners within the Canary Islands, rather than any mainland organization, as the area is classed as an autonomous region.
just leaving the BD issue to one side for a moment I am still un believing that in 2013 in Europe it can legally be the case that a small business person, a single owner of a tourist apartment , can be prevented from going about their business and must be compelled to offer the property, in a joint venture to be exploited by a third party, the sole agent, who then rents the place out.
its all very well any number of canarian judges to declare that the law is valid, but as I have said many times before, in western europe and within the eu, we dont usually come up against such invasive laws that point blank curtail normal uncontroversial activities.
I feel that its back to the emperors magic new clothes that only the wise can see. We need the small boy to come along and declare that the emperor is actually totally naked. I think thats the important small detail that people are missing out on here including the canarian judges. I would think that subject to a clever lawyer looking at the issue in detail through the eu laws and protections, it should be possible that the small business person should be able to operate freely and independently without any govt in the eu wanting them to be part of a converluted hotel. The eu is not supposed to be about protection for commercial groups, its about free markets. I certainly feel that the 1995 laws eliminate the freedom to be an independant renter and in adition the consumer is denied the ability to rent an independant apartment. The law forces the market to be for collective hotel style mass complex,s.
I just cant see that being tolerated by eu law.
Alicia en wunderbarland
x
Association/Forum Perhaps something like ALOTCA is ideally placed to represent the interests of property owners within the Canary Islands, rather than any mainland organization, as the area is classed as an autonomous region.
The new proposed laws are national. As per previous posts, they will only be implemented by the CA's after the national BOE has been passed with no successful appeals.
Angusjim
23-05-2013, 16:23
just leaving the BD issue to one side for a moment I am still un believing that in 2013 in Europe it can legally be the case that a small business person, a single owner of a tourist apartment , can be prevented from going about their business and must be compelled to offer the property, in a joint venture to be exploited by a third party, the sole agent, who then rents the place out.
its all very well any number of canarian judges to declare that the law is valid, but as I have said many times before, in western europe and within the eu, we dont usually come up against such invasive laws that point blank curtail normal uncontroversial activities.
I feel that its back to the emperors magic new clothes that only the wise can see. We need the small boy to come along and declare that the emperor is actually totally naked. I think thats the important small detail that people are missing out on here including the canarian judges. I would think that subject to a clever lawyer looking at the issue in detail through the eu laws and protections, it should be possible that the small business person should be able to operate freely and independently without any govt in the eu wanting them to be part of a converluted hotel. The eu is not supposed to be about protection for commercial groups, its about free markets. I certainly feel that the 1995 laws eliminate the freedom to be an independant renter and in adition the consumer is denied the ability to rent an independant apartment. The law forces the market to be for collective hotel style mass complex,s.
I just cant see that being tolerated by eu law.
If you feel so strongly why do you not take it up with your local MEP in th UK and ask him to comment on any potential breach of EU law and what can be done if that is the case
just leaving the BD issue to one side for a moment I am still un believing that in 2013 in Europe it can legally be the case that a small business person, a single owner of a tourist apartment , can be prevented from going about their business and must be compelled to offer the property, in a joint venture to be exploited by a third party, the sole agent, who then rents the place out.
its all very well any number of canarian judges to declare that the law is valid, but as I have said many times before, in western europe and within the eu, we dont usually come up against such invasive laws that point blank curtail normal uncontroversial activities.
I feel that its back to the emperors magic new clothes that only the wise can see. We need the small boy to come along and declare that the emperor is actually totally naked. I think thats the important small detail that people are missing out on here including the canarian judges. I would think that subject to a clever lawyer looking at the issue in detail through the eu laws and protections, it should be possible that the small business person should be able to operate freely and independently without any govt in the eu wanting them to be part of a converluted hotel. The eu is not supposed to be about protection for commercial groups, its about free markets. I certainly feel that the 1995 laws eliminate the freedom to be an independant renter and in adition the consumer is denied the ability to rent an independant apartment. The law forces the market to be for collective hotel style mass complex,s.
I just cant see that being tolerated by eu law.
Nelson, if EU law can tolerate a home in the UK being seized by local authorities for rental if the owner has left it empty for 2 years, then I'm pretty sure that the Spanish tourist letting laws are well within any reasonable interpretation of current legislation.
As said on many occasions, your activity is just business, so is not covered by any EU human rights laws.
Altamira
23-05-2013, 16:51
The new proposed laws are national. As per previous posts, they will only be implemented by the CA's after the national BOE has been passed with no successful appeals. Two New Tourist Laws I think we should firstly talk about the proposed new Canary Island tourist laws and then the proposed new national tourist laws that relate to Spain. These proposed new national laws appear to be following the Canary Tourist Laws (Existing & Proposed). The Spanish National Laws, I understand they can be altered by the Canary Government as the Canaries are an autonomous region.
in effect the canary 1995 have closed down and made illegal a complete industry, holiday apartment renting and letting. The usual description of letting in the canaries in touristics sort of sidesteps that odd and basic fact. You hear, " its is ok to rent to tourists but you have to do it through the sole agent, he has to have a reception etc. This statement misses the point, at a stroke there is no independant sector to offer to rent out holiday homes, all the customers can not freely choose an apartment that they prefer. In my view the 1995 laws are not just a set of rules that the renting owner needs to comply with, they are in effect laws that severely distort commercial freedom and consumer choice.
Both aspects that Eu law tends to seek to make sure is not the case.
Two New Tourist Laws I think we should firstly talk about the proposed new Canary Island tourist laws and then the proposed new national tourist laws that relate to Spain. These proposed new national laws appear to be following the Canary Tourist Laws (Existing & Proposed). The Spanish National Laws, I understand they can be altered by the Canary Government as the Canaries are an autonomous region.
Not correct. It's the other way around.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
in effect the canary 1995 have closed down and made illegal a complete industry, holiday apartment renting and letting. The usual description of letting in the canaries in touristics sort of sidesteps that odd and basic fact. You hear, " its is ok to rent to tourists but you have to do it through the sole agent, he has to have a reception etc. This statement misses the point, at a stroke there is no independant sector to offer to rent out holiday homes, all the customers can not freely choose an apartment that they prefer. In my view the 1995 laws are not just a set of rules that the renting owner needs to comply with, they are in effect laws that severely distort commercial freedom and consumer choice.
Both aspects that Eu law tends to seek to make sure is not the case.
This is hard work.
delderek
23-05-2013, 18:34
in effect the canary 1995 have closed down and made illegal a complete industry, holiday apartment renting and letting. The usual description of letting in the canaries in touristics sort of sidesteps that odd and basic fact. You hear, " its is ok to rent to tourists but you have to do it through the sole agent, he has to have a reception etc. This statement misses the point, at a stroke there is no independant sector to offer to rent out holiday homes, all the customers can not freely choose an apartment that they prefer. In my view the 1995 laws are not just a set of rules that the renting owner needs to comply with, they are in effect laws that severely distort commercial freedom and consumer choice.
Both aspects that Eu law tends to seek to make sure is not the case.
You really do have to admire this guy. Never changes, never listens, Never gives up,,,a true Brit. He would have made a good press officer for Saddam, in his last days.!!
Nelson, if EU law can tolerate a home in the UK being seized by local authorities for rental if the owner has left it empty for 2 years, then I'm pretty sure that the Spanish tourist letting laws are well within any reasonable interpretation of current legislation.
As said on many occasions, your activity is just business, so is not covered by any EU human rights laws.
And as said on many occasions - the 1995 law has been through the EU appeals process and was approved in 2006.
And as your ally, tonym, can probably tell you, the Services Directive (aka "Bolkestein") was drawn up over the years 2004-2006 to incorporate the outcome of the various cases dealt with by the EU :)
in effect the canary 1995 have closed down and made illegal a complete industry, holiday apartment renting and letting. The usual description of letting in the canaries in touristics sort of sidesteps that odd and basic fact. You hear, " its is ok to rent to tourists but you have to do it through the sole agent, he has to have a reception etc. This statement misses the point, at a stroke there is no independant sector to offer to rent out holiday homes, all the customers can not freely choose an apartment that they prefer. In my view the 1995 laws are not just a set of rules that the renting owner needs to comply with, they are in effect laws that severely distort commercial freedom and consumer choice.
Both aspects that Eu law tends to seek to make sure is not the case.
in effect the Canaries are finally sorting out their number one industry and starting to regulate it as they are with many other things. Tourist first and all that.
nelson
Seems to me you have an ideal choice of opportunities ahead of you. You can either sign up to the compromise arrangement when finalised, or have your lawyers go in front of the same Judge, the one that is of the opinion that the 1995 and subsequently amended law is sound, and fight your case, using Alice, Hitler, Franco and others as precedents for your argument(s).
Personally, if it were me in your shoes, I'd take the circa 5K fines per each of your rentals and move on. I suspect that the vast majority of those caught up in this will also go this route, especially since, as a compromise, you will not be landed with a criminal record on the Government files (as I understand to be the case). This could just keep you out of the lime-light when the Hacienda, as they surely will, dig deeper and deeper into the tax affairs of those with convictions on record.
Where you go from there is clearly your choice, Portugal perhaps or even Cape Verde maybe.
canary boy
23-05-2013, 21:08
Just accept it sell up and leave and wish the island people well and watch the 10 years of agony that Spain is going to endure
essexeddie
23-05-2013, 21:12
I'm staying out of this one, far out of my depth.:whistle:
It's not 5000 euro per rental. My fine was originaly 22000 euro, first appeal reduced to 15000 euro . My deal on the table pay and be done price is 5000 euro.
I did not get two fines , one per apartment .
duncan-6
23-05-2013, 21:52
So, if you've been a naughty boy, it's a 5000 euro fine, and then report to your designated sole agent, and he will will relieve you of 24.75% from now onwards, some people may think that unfair and sell up.
you got 1 fine for both apartments yeah ?
Some people do whatever they want. I do what I want.
I think the man who wrote , if you can meet with triumph and disaster yet treat both those imposters just the same , well he had a point.
I have faced far worse battles in my life, and lived to come out the other side
kiwiphil
23-05-2013, 21:59
nelson
Seems to me you have an ideal choice of opportunities ahead of you. You can either sign up to the compromise arrangement when finalised, or have your lawyers go in front of the same Judge, the one that is of the opinion that the 1995 and subsequently amended law is sound, and fight your case, using Alice, Hitler, Franco and others as precedents for your argument(s).
Personally, if it were me in your shoes, I'd take the circa 5K fines per each of your rentals and move on. I suspect that the vast majority of those caught up in this will also go this route, especially since, as a compromise, you will not be landed with a criminal record on the Government files (as I understand to be the case). This could just keep you out of the lime-light when the Hacienda, as they surely will, dig deeper and deeper into the tax affairs of those with convictions on record.
Where you go from there is clearly your choice, Portugal perhaps or even Cape Verde maybe.
Don't fold Nelson. Stand up to them. You know you're right. Who the hell are they to tell you what the law is. Judges? What do they know. Your argument is sound, and I'm sure you will articulate it well.
Have your day in court and sort them all out.
Oh .... and when you do, please let us all know. There's no where near enough good stand-up routines here and I just have to see this :)
Yes, I am one little tourist letting business, I could have had three or five apartments, it would still have been just one fine.
You are as well hung for a sheep as a lamb
Nelson & John the solicitor starring in Bloody Canarians
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Yes, I am one little tourist letting business, I could have had three or five apartments, it would still have been just one fine.
You are as well hung for a sheep as a lamb
The thing is nelson you are not a business
You actually had 2 fines nelson of €10,500 each one, that's €21,000 not €22,000
Some people do whatever they want. I do what I want.
What a rebel you are, Nelson. ;)
Whatever you do, don't let those judges get in the way of the law. And when the police come to precintar your apartments in Tenerife for non-payment of fines, just tell them that they are nothing but slaves of Mussolini and Franco so they'll have to leave or face EU supreme judges.
Angusjim
24-05-2013, 09:21
Some people do whatever they want. I do what I want.
I think the man who wrote , if you can meet with triumph and disaster yet treat both those imposters just the same , well he had a point.
I have faced far worse battles in my life, and lived to come out the other side
Thing is Nelson you have been good value on here and know how to wind up certain members and stalkers and I do agree with many of your senttiments about this law but facts are facts better to take the 5k offer and run. Your other issue I assume is what to do with your apartments perhaps put your efforts into getting your complex a sole agent or sell up ( if you can sell ). What ever you decide I hope it works out for you
Easy to sell Jim, those apartments on Sur Y Sol are now worth about €70,000 given the state that they are in.
Easy to sell Jim, those apartments on Sur Y Sol are now worth about €70,000 given the state that they are in.
I would not even want to buy them half price .
Altamira
24-05-2013, 10:47
nelson
Seems to me you have an ideal choice of opportunities ahead of you. You can either sign up to the compromise arrangement when finalised, or have your lawyers go in front of the same Judge, the one that is of the opinion that the 1995 and subsequently amended law is sound, and fight your case, using Alice, Hitler, Franco and others as precedents for your argument(s).
Personally, if it were me in your shoes, I'd take the circa 5K fines per each of your rentals and move on. I suspect that the vast majority of those caught up in this will also go this route, especially since, as a compromise, you will not be landed with a criminal record on the Government files (as I understand to be the case). This could just keep you out of the lime-light when the Hacienda, as they surely will, dig deeper and deeper into the tax affairs of those with convictions on record.
Where you go from there is clearly your choice, Portugal perhaps or even Cape Verde maybe.
Injustice I understand some illegal renters have already paid their fines, do they now have a criminal record? I also believe that their fines will not be reduced to the 5000 euros as they have already paid and have therefore accepted their guilt. If this is correct then it flies in the face of natural justice.
I am also amused that this proposed out of court settlement is happening before the proposed new Canary tourist laws come into force, I understand they may be finalized around August this year. Is there any reason/connection why the Canary Government/Judiciary wish for this to be settled now before the new Canary laws come into force.
Injustice I understand some illegal renters have already paid their fines, do they now have a criminal record? I also believe that their fines will not be reduced to the 5000 euros as they have already paid and have therefore accepted their guilt. If this is correct then it flies in the face of natural justice. I am also amused that this proposed out of court settlement is happening before the proposed new Canary tourist laws come into force, I understand they may be finalized around August this year. Is there any reason/connection why the Canary Government/Judiciary wish for this to be settled now before the new Canary laws come into force.
I don't think we need to head into the realms of Conspiracy Theory here as the new law seems to be mainly about modernisation and the enforcement of the building moratorium. I think the idea of a settlement is more to do with unblocking the already overcrowded Courts :)
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
Tenerife Weekly have been quick to cover the recent developments - quoting in full the post by Janet on her blog. Let's hope the other papers follow suit.
http://issuu.com/tenerife-weekly/docs/tenerife-weekly-issue-82
duncan-6
24-05-2013, 13:38
I would not even want to buy them half price .
Iv'e stayed there a few times, and again later this year, I was thinking of buying when all this is finally sorted, why would you not have one at half price? location is better than them up the hill, just interested, thanks.
Iv'e stayed there a few times, and again later this year, I was thinking of buying when all this is finally sorted, why would you not have one at half price? location is better than them up the hill, just interested, thanks.
I'm not sure Sol y Sur will ever be "sorted" ... listening to nelson, there did not seem to be any wish to bring back a Sole Agent, and without that structure, the Licence cannot be revived.
Angusjim
24-05-2013, 13:57
Iv'e stayed there a few times, and again later this year, I was thinking of buying when all this is finally sorted, why would you not have one at half price? location is better than them up the hill, just interested, thanks.
Brilliant so you are against nasty old Nelson renting out but you support illegal letting on his complex by the back door:crylaughing::crylaughing:
Iv'e stayed there a few times, and again later this year, I was thinking of buying when all this is finally sorted, why would you not have one at half price? location is better than them up the hill, just interested, thanks.
One of the positive spin offs of the proposed new laws is that properties will settle back to their true value; ie, the average person will be able to afford to buy their own property once more.
Peterrayner
24-05-2013, 14:17
Brilliant so you are against nasty old Nelson renting out but you support illegal letting on his complex by the back door:crylaughing::crylaughing:
Well said Jim.
There`s that faint hint of that nasty sniff of Schadenfreude appearing again. :)
golf birdie
24-05-2013, 14:46
Iv'e stayed there a few times, and again later this year, I was thinking of buying when all this is finally sorted, why would you not have one at half price? location is better than them up the hill, just interested, thanks.
classic :laugh: Moan about tax dodgers whilst giving them your cash :laugh:
Peterrayner
24-05-2013, 15:17
Courtesy of JA`s website
Update 24 May: The Canarian government yesterday approved clauses for the new law so as to provide a framework within which more than 5,000 villas in the Canaries that are currently residential will be able to be used touristically; moreover, their plots will be reclassified at Government level, thus bypassing where necessary individual Cabildo restrictions and Ayuntamiento land usage designations. The law will also considerably reduce the “coastal band” for villa legitimacy: the Government had been aiming for a 500m exlusion area but this has now been reduced to 200m, and even further to 100m if in a clifftop area. Lanzarote, which is where around half of the properties affected are located, is likely to benefit especially from the measure.
The final debate on the legislation is scheduled to take place this coming Tuesday. This is something that Alotca has lobbied actively for, and continued to negotiate about even though much of the work was carried out in the background. Although we’ll have to wait until at least Tuesday for the final detail, needless to say we are absolutely delighted with this news.
Seems like ALOTCA`s work behind the scenes has paid some dividends.
I can see that the comment about the Canarian government bypassing the individual Cabildos and Ayuntamientos regarding reclassifications maybe sparking some lively debate. :D
kiwiphil
24-05-2013, 15:19
listening to nelson.
Now there's a problem .....
Altamira
24-05-2013, 15:24
Courtesy of JA`s website
Seems like ALOTCA`s work behind the scenes has paid some dividends.
Villas Will this mean that villas will need to band themselves into groups and then appoint a sole agent? if not then why should an apartment owner need the services of a sole agent? I think this villa scenario may destroy any argument for sole agents.
Peterrayner
24-05-2013, 15:27
Villas Will this mean that villas will need to band themselves into groups and then appoint a sole agent? if not then why should an apartment owner need the services of a sole agent? I think this villa scenario may destroy any argument for sole agents.
some villas are "stand alone" and some are on "communities"
its always struck me as unworkable to give a villa free individual letting and not an apartment owner. Its the self same principle. There will be some mileage in that to make legal representations about.
its a welcome move if the villas are going to get legal, and much nearer the coast than the hotels would wish.
all the anti villa reasoning is clearly protectionist nonsense, as if a villa holidaymaker should be stopped from having their choice because they should be in a hotel. As if hotels are so scared of villa holiday rentals taking their business they should demand that villas can not rent except at a distance back from the sea front.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
I'm not sure Sol y Sur will ever be "sorted" ... listening to nelson, there did not seem to be any wish to bring back a Sole Agent, and without that structure, the Licence cannot be revived.
the place still has the same sole agent that ran part of it when we bought in 2004. its not dormant, that explains why it is still on aronas website of legal accomodation.
its always struck me as unworkable to give a villa free individual letting and not an apartment owner. Its the self same principle. There will be some mileage in that to make legal representations about.
its a welcome move if the villas are going to get legal, and much nearer the coast than the hotels would wish.
all the anti villa reasoning is clearly protectionist nonsense, as if a villa holidaymaker should be stopped from having their choice because they should be in a hotel. As if hotels are so scared of villa holiday rentals taking their business they should demand that villas can not rent except at a distance back from the sea front.
- - - - - - - - - - merged double post - - - - - - - - - -
the place still has the same sole agent that ran part of it when we bought in 2004. its not dormant, that explains why it is still on aronas website of legal accomodation.
So, not only did you buy to let knowing the law, you chose to let directly yourself and not ues the agent, then come on bleating??
Any sympathy I may have had has suddenly dissapeared !
to repeat what I have said before, the deal from the agent at the start was 4000 euro per year and 2 weeks for you to stay. we considered it. having spoke to old hands on our place the advice was , dont touch the agent with a bargepole. they would get you behind for 6 months money and then declare that the dutch/ swedes/ belgans had not paid them and you will get done down. I was told that many old hands had taken them to court and still ended up with no payment.
Absolutley no buyers of apartments took up the deal with the agent. We all thought that we were dormant until this started and then we found out that the licence is in place , its not de registered.
to repeat what I have said before, the deal from the agent at the start was 4000 euro per year and 2 weeks for you to stay. we considered it. having spoke to old hands on our place the advice was , dont touch the agent with a bargepole. they would get you behind for 6 months money and then declare that the dutch/ swedes/ belgans had not paid them and you will get done down. I was told that many old hands had taken them to court and still ended up with no payment.
Absolutley no buyers of apartments took up the deal with the agent. We all thought that we were dormant until this started and then we found out that the licence is in place , its not de registered.
I bet it was the sole agent who dobbed you in to turismo.
essexeddie
24-05-2013, 17:17
So, if you've been a naughty boy, it's a 5000 euro fine, and then report to your designated sole agent, and he will will relieve you of 24.75% from now onwards, some people may think that unfair and sell up.
Or just don't let, for what you make out of it now.
I slung it all in now I can come out when I like. Should have done it years ago.
.
no cant blame him for that, for one thing at the time we bought he did not actually have the required 50 plus 1 himself. He was not strictly legal himself . That explains why he never de registered us all.
The revised text of the Draft Law is here http://www.parcan.es/files/pub/bop/8l/2013/142/bo142.pdf
Articles 30 & 31 deal with villas
.... anyone heard from hughsby of late ... hope his villa is further than 200m from the sea :)
The revised text of the Draft Law is here http://www.parcan.es/files/pub/bop/8l/2013/142/bo142.pdf
Articles 30 & 31 deal with villas
.... anyone heard from hughsby of late ... hope his villa is further than 200m from the sea :)
Have checked his profile and he was online on 14/05/13 but hasn't posted anything since September last year
There is an update from Janet:
Update 24 May: I’ve been asked to point out that the offer of a class action with a €5,000 fine for signing a document is only available to those cases which form the majority of Alotca appeals – i.e. those whose fines started at €18,000 and which were reduced on first appeal to the government to €13,800. All cases in the class action must be identical, and clearly, not all are, with some owners being fined on the basis of random inspections and/or private adverts, others for running multiple properties as a business, and yet others who have been denounced by communities or neighbours etc.
As a general rule, anyone who has ended up with a confirmed fine of above €13,800 will have been fined for a different type of infraction – very generally these will be for offences against the “principio de unidad de explotación e intermediación turística”, i.e. sole agent system, or multiple apartment letting. All Alotca clients who fall into the class action category will now have received, or will shortly receive, an invitation to join the class action. As of today, I can confirm the outcome one of these (different) types of cases where the appeal was rejected yesterday by the Court and the Government’s fine upheld … and with no possibility of appeal granted.
duncan-6
24-05-2013, 19:17
I'm not sure Sol y Sur will ever be "sorted" ... listening to nelson, there did not seem to be any wish to bring back a Sole Agent, and without that structure, the Licence cannot be revived.
That's fair enough Doreen, I just happened to like the complex that's all, I thought about buying there and still do, Iv'e taken advice from somebody well respected in Tenerife, I know all about the licence situation, and from our point of view hope it is not reinstated because we dont want to rent anyway.
The revised text of the Draft Law is here http://www.parcan.es/files/pub/bop/8l/2013/142/bo142.pdf
Articles 30 & 31 deal with villas
.... anyone heard from hughsby of late ... hope his villa is further than 200m from the sea :)
Can someone make a compilation of his best bits - 9plus????
duncan-6
24-05-2013, 19:31
Brilliant so you are against nasty old Nelson renting out but you support illegal letting on his complex by the back door:crylaughing::crylaughing:
Not against nelson letting at all, or anybody else, but I am against tax avoidance and so are many others, and I don't support illegal letting either.
Not against nelson letting at all, or anybody else, but I am against tax avoidance and so are many others, and I don't support illegal letting either.
If you don't support illegal renting why do you rent from owners in an illegal complex ?
duncan-6
24-05-2013, 20:36
If you don't support illegal renting why do you rent from owners in an illegal complex ?
Because I dont rent from "owners" at all!...I stay in the same apartment everytime, since 2008, thanks to ONE owner I know very very well indeed,( who by the way has not been fined, and never ever will be), and I have known for donkeys years, and if I got it any cheaper it would be free almost!...but thats my business, not yours, now get your fine paid and behave.
Altamira
24-05-2013, 20:43
Because I dont rent from "owners" at all!...I stay in the same apartment everytime, since 2008, thanks to ONE owner I know very very well indeed,( who by the way has not been fined, and never ever will be), and I have known for donkeys years, and if I got it any cheaper it would be free almost!...but thats my business, not yours, now get your fine paid and behave.
Guilty It sounds as though you were illegally renting an apartment "Free almost" sounds like not rent free.
duncan-6
24-05-2013, 20:53
Guilty It sounds as though you were illegally renting an apartment "Free almost" sounds like not rent free.
OK, have it your own way Sherlock Holmes, whatever you say.
Angusjim
25-05-2013, 07:18
Not against nelson letting at all, or anybody else, but I am against tax avoidance and so are many others, and I don't support illegal letting either.
So its that old chesnut "friends & family" I hops they declare the money that you do pay, don't know how you can sleep at night:spin::laugh:
duncan-6
25-05-2013, 07:55
So its that old chesnut "friends & family" I hops they declare the money that you do pay, don't know how you can sleep at night:spin::laugh:
You dont know how I sleep at night?.....it's listening to people like YOU!, = instant ZZZZZzzzzz's
How narrow minded can you be, because a friend who I have known and worked with for nearly forty years, lets me his apt for almost nothing, and the rest of the year it's between himself/wife, 2 daughters/family etc,....you have it in your muttonhead, that I support illegal activity.
Peterrayner
25-05-2013, 09:01
its "private personal use!" according to a well known lawyer. :)
slodgedad
25-05-2013, 09:50
I know the 'friends and family' phrase keeps popping up but is this actually stated anywhere, or is it private personal use?
I don't know the legality of it but I found it hard to believe that if someone purchases a property to use as a holiday home, and by the very nature of the fact that it is a "holiday home", only uses it themselves for a few weeks a year, that if they wish they can say to close friends and family ... "look it's sat there empty, make use of the place". Obviously if they then charge them for the privilege then that's a commercial let, but if it's sat there empty and then allow friends to use it in their absence surely that can't be wrong can it?
Red Devil
25-05-2013, 10:36
I don't know the legality of it but I found it hard to believe that if someone purchases a property to use as a holiday home, and by the very nature of the fact that it is a "holiday home", only uses it themselves for a few weeks a year, that if they wish they can say to close friends and family ... "look it's sat there empty, make use of the place". Obviously if they then charge them for the privilege then that's a commercial let, but if it's sat there empty and then allow friends to use it in their absence surely that can't be wrong can it?
Of course you can let your family and friends use your own legally owned apartment, the criteria is that you arent supplying any "tourist" facilities. End of.
duncan smith admitts to paying for the apartment, therefore its a touristic let. he says he pays very little as if to justify his illegal renting.
Clearly we can all see that its a case of one rule for him and another for everyone else.
He is in the front row of the lynch mob for me, arm ready back to cast the first stone, then its back to the comforts of his illegally rented apartment and he can post on here about how evil I am.
Maybe the govt/ashhotel will agree with him and set a legal low rent limit for family and friends, friends on sliding legal scale according to how many years you have been freinds, so duncans 40 years hopefully enough to be legal?
I would think that these cases like Duncans , would be fully exempt from NIGC tax as well?
golf birdie
25-05-2013, 10:51
Because I dont rent from "owners" at all!...I stay in the same apartment everytime, since 2008, thanks to ONE owner I know very very well indeed,( who by the way has not been fined, and never ever will be), and I have known for donkeys years, and if I got it any cheaper it would be free almost!...but thats my business, not yours, now get your fine paid and behave.
but its not FREE, you pay for the service. That is a rental. Whatever dress you put on it, its a rental and tax is payable.
Red Devil
25-05-2013, 10:57
duncan smith admitts to paying for the apartment, therefore its a touristic let. he says he pays very little as if to justify his illegal renting.
Clearly we can all see that its a case of one rule for him and another for everyone else.
He is in the front row of the lynch mob for me, arm ready back to cast the first stone, then its back to the comforts of his illegally rented apartment and he can post on here about how evil I am.
Maybe the govt/ashhotel will agree with him and set a legal low rent limit for family and friends, friends on sliding legal scale according to how many years you have been freinds, so duncans 40 years hopefully enough to be legal?
I would think that these cases like Duncans , would be fully exempt from NIGC tax as well?
Ha ha ha, Nelson you are growing on me daily, :tiphat:
Peterrayner
25-05-2013, 11:06
I let my family, brothers, daughter etc. and 2 or 3 sets of very close personal friends, use my apartment and I don't charge them any rental.
They do offer a contribution towards the electric and water and laundry costs.
I don't advertise or offer any touristic service, ie transfers, meals, maid service, excursions, etc. and consider this to be legitimate private and personal use.
Peter ... do you still have a copy that famous & oft quoted letter from M Cabrea on Family & Friends :)
Remember Duncan hasn't broken any Law or received a fine for doing so
cheers
x
golf birdie
25-05-2013, 11:40
Remember Duncan hasn't broken any Law or received a fine for doing so
cheers
x
same as none of the people who stayed/are staying at nelsons apartment have'nt.
Cheers
x
duncan-6
25-05-2013, 12:16
I let my family, brothers, daughter etc. and 2 or 3 sets of very close personal friends, use my apartment and I don't charge them any rental.
They do offer a contribution towards the electric and water and laundry costs.
I don't advertise or offer any touristic service, ie transfers, meals, maid service, excursions, etc. and consider this to be legitimate private and personal use.
EXACTLY Peter, but try getting that across to some of the numpties on here, and of course our resident number ONE TAX EVADER from Barnsley.
Red Devil
25-05-2013, 12:19
I really think Nelson is toying with you all a little :)
duncan-6
25-05-2013, 12:27
duncan smith admitts to paying for the apartment, therefore its a touristic let. he says he pays very little as if to justify his illegal renting.
Clearly we can all see that its a case of one rule for him and another for everyone else.
He is in the front row of the lynch mob for me, arm ready back to cast the first stone, then its back to the comforts of his illegally rented apartment and he can post on here about how evil I am.
Maybe the govt/ashhotel will agree with him and set a legal low rent limit for family and friends, friends on sliding legal scale according to how many years you have been freinds, so duncans 40 years hopefully enough to be legal?
I would think that these cases like Duncans , would be fully exempt from NIGC tax as well?
Who is Duncan "Smith" ? tax evader.
DID YOU TAKE UP THE BET WITH KIWIPHIL? (post7544), If you really believed you were right , you could of made some easy money, and tax free at that !!....but something tells me you didn't, which just goes to prove that for the want of a better word, you are all... "wind and p**s.
Angusjim
25-05-2013, 12:37
I really think Nelson is toying with you all a little :)
Don't think the penny has dropped yet with some members:spin::laugh:
What the difference between not charging rent but accepting contributions for cleaning, electrics, water and community fees....
Vs
Not charging rent but accepting contributions for the above and mortgage payments?
golf birdie
25-05-2013, 12:54
What the difference between not charging rent but accepting contributions for cleaning, electrics, water and community fees....
Vs
Not charging rent but accepting contributions for the above and mortgage payments?
the difference is which way you want it to work:laugh:
duncan-6
25-05-2013, 13:17
IF for example, I was renting off an owner, and paying full wack to him, and this owner rented out for as many of the 52 weeks per year he could, then yes, I would be contributing to illegal letting, BUT because I'm doing nothing of the kind, as I said in (post7728), your argument against me is not valid.
NOW COME NELLIE,..DID YOU TAKE UP KIWIPHIL'S BET ?...easy money, tax free, you liked that last bit didn't you,...you little rascal!
golf birdie
25-05-2013, 13:24
IF for example, I was renting off an owner, and paying full wack to him, and this owner rented out for as many of the 52 weeks per year he could, then yes, I would be contributing to illegal letting, BUT because I'm doing nothing of the kind, as I said in (post7728), your argument against me is not valid.
NOW COME NELLIE,..DID YOU TAKE UP KIWIPHIL'S BET ?...easy money, tax free, you liked that last bit didn't you,...you little rascal!
I had a plumber ''mate'' fix a leak in my apartment, gave him 20 euros for his trouble. He has a lot of ''mates'' who he helps out for free they also just give him something for his trouble. Never seems to pay much tax :confused:
Peterrayner
25-05-2013, 14:22
What the difference between not charging rent but accepting contributions for cleaning, electrics, water and community fees....
Vs
Not charging rent but accepting contributions for the above and mortgage payments?
My relatives don't pay anything :( as I am usually with them but not always.
The friends contributions are a personal and private arrangement and no rental is expected or offered. No mention of mortgages or community fees was made. ???
This use is very limited and amounts to about 4 -6 times a year maybe.
I guess if or when the inspectors call then we will get a definitive answer.
what you are trying to do is muddle a very clear line.
a rent payment is a rent payment.
a contribution to cleaning is a rent payment by another name.
obviously all the illegal renters could try the contribution to cleaning argument as a dodge to the crackdown. They could put it on owners direct as " zero rent but cleaning contribution £200 per week".
It matters not if the cleaning contribution is £20 per week or £200 per week its still an illegal rent and the punter should be dragged to the Bitacora and forced to check in there,or failing that be taken directly to the airport and told in future to try a rented apartment somewhere in the world where they they put up with that sort of thing.
duncan-6
25-05-2013, 14:47
I had a plumber ''mate'' fix a leak in my apartment, gave him 20 euros for his trouble. He has a lot of ''mates'' who he helps out for free they also just give him something for his trouble. Never seems to pay much tax :confused:
Did you report him to the authorities, since you are squeaky clean?
golf birdie
25-05-2013, 15:10
Did you report him to the authorities, since you are squeaky clean?
I've never claimed to be squeaky clean, I just find it amazing how so many who do take the high ground turn out to be amongst the worst offenders. Reminds me of politicians, 'do as we say not as we do' ;)
My relatives don't pay anything :( as I am usually with them but not always.
The friends contributions are a personal and private arrangement and no rental is expected or offered. No mention of mortgages or community fees was made. ???
This use is very limited and amounts to about 4 -6 times a year maybe.
I guess if or when the inspectors call then we will get a definitive answer.
I wouldn't worry in the slightest Peter. Anyone you know well enough to generously offer the use of your apartment, free of charge, will be able to satisfy any inspector that you are doing nothing wrong. We all know the difference between someone commercially letting their holiday home to "friends/family" for the majority of the year, and those who genuinely allow their nearest and dearest to use an apartment in their absence.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.