The ruling will determine the validity of the consolidation of the tax carried out under the 2021 Budget Law.<\/p>\n
The Constitutional Court<\/strong> has postponed its decision on the constitutionality of the Wealth Tax until 2026, a matter that has been pending since 2021, when the appeal against the law that made the tax permanent was admitted for consideration.<\/p>\n The legal question centres around whether the General State Budget Law can be used to introduce substantial amendments to an existing tax, such as its temporary or permanent nature, or whether such a measure should have been adopted\u00a0 by means of a specific law governing\u00a0 the tax itself.<\/p>\n Regulatory background\u00a0 and evolution of the tax<\/strong><\/p>\n The Wealth Tax was abolished in 2008 and temporarily reinstated in 2011, with successive extensions until the 2021 Budget Law removed its time limit, thereby\u00a0 making it indefinite.<\/p>\n At the same time, some autonomous communities that had reduced or eliminated\u00a0 the tax reinstated\u00a0 its application in recent years, particularly\u00a0 after the introduction\u00a0 of the Solidarity Tax on Large Fortunes.<\/p>\n This has led to a significant increase in tax revenue, while at the same time multiplying the number of assessments\u00a0 that could be reviewed if the Constitutional Court were to declare the measure unconstitutional.<\/p>\n \n Possible effects of the ruling<\/strong><\/p>\n A favourable ruling could entail the annulment\u00a0 of the provision that made the tax permanent, with the consequent right to a refund of amounts unduly paid, limited to taxpayers who have challenged their assessments\u00a0 or have proceedings pending.<\/p>\n However, following the Court’s usual doctrine, it is foreseeable that the retroactive effects of the ruling will be modulated, restricting refunds in order to preserve legal certainty and budgetary stability.<\/p>\n \n Practical recommendations<\/strong><\/p>\n Until the final ruling is issued, it is advisable to:<\/p>\n\n