LAS PALMAS DE GRAN CANARIA, July 28, 2025 — Limiting home purchases by non-resident foreigners in the Canary Islands faces significant EU hurdles, though “dissuasive fiscal measures” could be a path forward, acknowledged Matilde Asan, the region’s Minister of Finance.
Canary Islands Minister Eyes Fiscal Tools for Foreign Home Buyer Curbs Amid EU Concerns
Canary Islands seeks fiscal solutions to curb foreign home buying, facing EU restrictions.
- The Canary Islands’ government is exploring “dissuasive fiscal measures” to limit home purchases by non-resident foreigners.
- These measures are being considered due to significant obstacles in directly restricting such purchases within the European Union framework.
- In 2023, non-EU residents bought 27,000 homes in Spain, primarily for speculation rather than residency.
- Spain is a popular destination for second homes and holiday properties, attracting buyers from the U.S., U.K., Morocco, Venezuela, and Mexico.
- EU law requires restrictions on capital movement to be justified by general interest demands and adhere to non-discrimination principles.
Asan’s statement came during a session of the Parliament of the Canary Islands’ Commission of European Affairs and Foreign Action. She was responding to socialist deputy Lucía Fuentes Mesa, who inquired about the feasibility of a proposal first announced by Canary Islands President Fernando Clavijo in March.
Fuentes highlighted Spain’s “Golden Visa” program, introduced in 2013, and noted that non-EU residents purchased 27,000 homes in Spain in 2023, often for speculative purposes. She emphasized Spain’s popularity for second homes and vacation properties, with significant interest from American, British, Moroccan, Venezuelan, and Mexican buyers.
Why are there obstacles to limiting foreign home purchases in the Canary Islands? Asan explained that the acquisition of secondary housing is classified as a capital movement. This is regulated by the European Union’s foundational treaty. She elaborated that any restrictions on the free movement of capital must be backed by “imperious demands of general interest” and uphold non-discrimination and proportionality.
The socialist deputy questioned the alignment of Clavijo’s proposal with EU policies, asking if it would fit within the framework of the European Commission and Parliament. Fuentes also pointed to a lack of internal government coordination, noting that “only a month later, the PP rejected a similar motion in the mixed insularity commission.”
Asan acknowledged precedents for territorial restrictions on housing acquisition in Europe, citing Finland and Malta. However, she stressed these were negotiated before their EU accession. For Spain, any such restrictions would require justification before the EU Court of Justice. The court has previously ruled that secondary residence acquisition can be limited in specific zones if it serves purposes like population stabilization or promoting a non-tourist economy.
The minister confirmed that the Canary Islands government is prioritizing fiscal solutions over outright bans. “We are contemplating dissuasive fiscal measures for this issue,” Asan stated, reiterating that “absolute limitation is not authorized in European law.”
A working group has been formed under the presidents’ conference to examine legal and fiscal possibilities. This group includes regional councils and other public and social stakeholders. “It is premature to establish conclusions,” Asan cautioned, while reaffirming the regional executive’s commitment to sustainable and balanced development.
