Reference value passes the constitutional test

The determination of the value of real estate in wealth taxes has been and continues to be one of the main conflicts between taxpayers and the Tax Administration. Through the publication of Law 11/2021, of July 9, on measures to prevent and combat tax fraud, the reference value was introduced, an objective valuation of a property's value set by the Directorate General of Cadastre, defined by the recent Constitutional Court ruling as 'a value that taxes average or potential values close to market ones.'

Since then, the following question arose: Can a value determined using general and objective criteria, without taking into account the particularities of the property in question, violate the principle of economic capacity cited in Article 31.1 of the Spanish Constitution?

Based on this doubt, the Superior Court of Justice of Andalusia, Ceuta, and Melilla ('SCJ of Andalusia, Ceuta, and Melilla') submitted a question of unconstitutionality regarding the reference value to the Constitutional Court, and its answer could not have been clearer, it unanimously dismissed the question raised.

Specifically, the SCJ of Andalusia, Ceuta, and Melilla questioned whether the fact that the tax base in a self-assessment of the Transfer Tax (''TT') was set by an objective, general, imprecise, and approximate method, could lead to excessive or disproportionate taxation based on an alleged wealth created through the simplification and objectification of the Tax Administration.

As argued in the legal press release published on February 12, 2026, the plenary of the Constitutional Court rejects the question of unconstitutionality of the reference value, stating (i) that it is an adequate measurement of taxable wealth, with a reasonable connection between the fact and the tax base (ii) that its inclusion pursues legitimate purposes, such as administrative simplification, reduction of litigation, legal certainty, and prevention of tax fraud, and (iii) the most important argument, that the taxpayer can appeal when they can demonstrate that the determined reference value is far from the market value of the property in question. In other words, the plenary of the high court claims that we are not facing a fixed, irrefutable, or rigid value, but the opposite, since the taxpayer, as recognized in the information note, can request a correction of this ''without any evidentiary limit'.

Therefore, the reference value is unanimously supported by the Constitutional Court, leaving all responsibility and the burden of proof for correcting its market value, when appropriate, to the taxpayer.