Radical turn of the Supreme Court on the subject of the tax of Documented Legal Acts (AJD) on mortgages. After two days of intense deliberations, the 28 magistrates gathered in the plenary session of the third chamber of the High Court have agreed, by 15 votes to 13, to return to the criterion by which it is the client who must pay the tribute when formalizing a loan for the purchase of housing. The text of the three sentences on the resourses analyzed since yesterday by these judges will be known in the coming days.
On October 18, the second section of the third jump of the High Court ruled, before a recourse, that it must be the bank and not the client, as it had been sucking in the last 30 years, who must pay the AJD tax on the mortgages . In this way, the Supreme Court annulled the provisions of the tax regulations and changed the previous jurisprudence of the Court itself.
Not even 24 hours after the decision was heard, in an unusual decision that justified "the enormous economic and social impact" generated – the bank sank on the stock market due to fear of a million dollar bill for the retroactive payment of the tax – the The president of the contentious-administrative chamber, Luis María Díez-Picazo, restrained the pending appeals for this matter and summoned the plenary to study the case to unify doctrine, which was interpreted as a disavowal to the second section. The president of the Supreme Court, Carlos Lesmes, came to apologize publicly for the chaos generated in the mortgage market.
That disavowal of the six judges of the second section, although one of them issued a particular vote against, ratified yesterday the plenary session – in which the 6 judges of the second section also voted – by rejecting three new appeals against the taxpayer of the AJD tax and return to the previous doctrine. Of course, the 28 magistrates reached that decision after two days of discussion and a very tight vote (15 votes against 13) that show the division and total fracture of the third room in two. In fact, and as ABC learned, until mid-afternoon on Tuesday, when the plenary resumed after a lunch break, the room was inclined, although also by minority, to ratify the criterion that the bank should assume The tax.
This new change of criteria of the Supreme Court has already provoked the first reactions of associations of consumers and political parties. Facua called the decision "aberration" and recalled that in 2013 the High Court decided that "the bank will be left with everything that defrauded with the floor clauses." "The decision of the Supreme Court that is the client who pays the taxes of the mortgage, correcting itself, I think it is a serious error of unforeseeable social consequences," said for his part the president of the Popular Party of Catalonia, Xavier García Albiol, on your Twitter account. "The bank wins and the citizens lose. The independence of the Supreme Court is in question; weakened democracy ", said the leader of Podemos, Pablo Iglesias.