The Supreme Court relaxes the means of proof for the application of the minimum disability threshold

The degree of disability is accredited by means of the corresponding certificate or resolution issued by the Institute for Migration and Social Services (IMSERSO) or the competent body of the Autonomous Communities (CCAA), so that those who have it do not need any other additional justification, and any other legally accepted means of proof may also be used to accredit this degree, as the tax regulations do not establish that such certificates or resolutions are exclusive and excluding proof.

Flexible or open-ended interpretation of the standard

In the opinion of the High Court, the Tax Law does not restrict the means of proof of disability and its degree to the certificate or resolution of the IMSERSO or the competent regional body. For the accreditation of these extremes, the law refers to the conditions established by regulation, facilitating proof for Social Security pensioners and judicially incapacitated persons, for whom a specific degree of disability is considered to be accredited by that fact alone.

In relation to the Tax Regulation, although at first sight it might appear that proof of the degree of disability is limited, insofar as it states that it must be accredited by means of a certificate or resolution issued by the IMSERSO or the competent body of the Autonomous Regions, this regulation does not explicitly state that such resolutions or certificates are exclusive and excluding evidence, and the aforementioned article should be interpreted as meaning that, far from restricting proof of disability, it introduces a criterion of objectivity, for tax purposes only, for the accreditation of their degree, on the basis of the aforementioned certificates or resolutions, presenting this as the safest and most efficient way to prove disability and its degree, in such a way that whoever has a certificate or resolution in their favour will be freed from any other additional proof, but does not limit the proof to this alone, because excluding such proof through other means would violate the freedom that, in terms of the choice of means of proof, rules that operate as an interpretative framework of the Regulation.

Furthermore, the application of the minimum disability tax is a response to the adaptation of the tax to the personal and family circumstances of the taxpayer, affecting economic capacity, so that paying the tax by ignoring the reality of the degree of disability, whose existence in the case examined in the judgment has been accredited after the appropriate assessment of the evidence, also entails ignoring the fact that the tax must be levied in accordance with personal circumstances, closely related to economic capacity and which consequently justify the application of the tax benefit.

If you have any doubts about this subject, please do not hesitate to contact us, by telephone to Carles Monfort Codina or by e-mail to cmc@btsasociados.com, we will be delighted to help you.