2023-05-28 06:02:24
People who have the right to deduct the investment in housing in Personal Income Tax (IRPF) for having acquired it before January 1, 2013 and who receive a refund from the bank for abusive clauses declared null and void, such as land, mortgage expenses or multi-currency mortgages, among others, they must return to the Treasury the corresponding part that had been deducted for the amount that has now been paid to them the financial institution.
The General Directorate of Taxes (DGT) clarifies that when a financial institution is ordered to return to the consumer the amounts that have been overpaid, if those amounts have formed part of the deduction base for investment in habitual residence, “the right to make the deduction would be lost in relation to them, which obliges to regularize such tax situation”.
Prescription
The tax office indicates in its response on April 26 to a query from a taxpayer that although the years in which the deduction for investment in the acquisition of habitual residence was practiced could be prescribed, “The obligation to regularize the amount of the deductions improperly made is notbecause said obligation arises in the tax period in which the requirements that gave the right to the deduction are not met.
According to the General Directorate of Taxes, It is with this non-compliance when enforceability arises of that specific tax debt without prejudice to the fact that they come from deductions made in prescribed years.
On the other hand, and another different consultation dated April 27, the Tax Administration also indicates that The subrogation or novation of a mortgage loan does not end the benefit of being able to deduct the purchase of a house from personal income tax.provided that it had been acquired before 1st 2013, the date from which the regulations changed and this deduction for the acquisition of habitual residence was no longer allowed.
The DGT thus responds to a taxpayer who bought her house in 2012 through a mortgage loan and is now considering canceling it in order to take out a new mortgage with another third party that gives her better conditions.
The Treasury refers to article 70.1 of the Personal Income Tax Law to indicate that the novation, subrogation or substitution of a loan or credit for another, its extension or whatever the agreed form of modifying the loan, “It does not entail understanding that at that moment the financing process of the corresponding investment concludes”. Thus, therefore, it determines that the possibilities of practicing the deduction in the Income statement are not exhausted either.
#housing #exemption #returned #bank #compensates #abusive #clauses