Investing in Spanish offices

March 27th, 2015

After 7 years of real state inactivity in 2014 International Funds came back, transforming Spain into a hot market for commercial property investments again.

In 2014, investments in non residential assets of €7 billion almost tripled the investments in 2013. 

  

The investors were looking for well-located large shopping centres and office buildings, although the office market accounted for 39% of the transactions mainly in Madrid and Barcelona.

The tax advantages of investing via SOCIMI with Nil Corporation Tax, makes this type of spanish real state investment funds something to be considered. More information at the Spanish Tax Office site http://tinyurl.com/nhrmhok

We should also mention the advantages of obtaining Spanish residency by investing in Spain, via Spanish Golden Visa as featured in this article at http://www.delcantochambers.com/do-you-have-real-estate-investments-in-spain-apply-now-for-your-golden-visa-residency/

Invest in a Spanish start up and obtain the Golden Visa

March 25th, 2015

Investing in a Spanish start-up not only has numerous tax advantages, but can also open the doors for the Spanish Golden Visa, ie the residency permit in Spain.

A startup company or just emerging company is a term currently used to refer to a business project around ideas that are just beginning. These companies are generally associated with innovation, technology development, web design or web development.

There are currently more than 3,000 start-ups in Spain in which to invest. With the aim of promoting these projects, the government has implemented tax changes that favor investment in these companies. And if you decide to invest as an individual -and not as a society- you will benefit from even higher deductions and rebates.

All this is good news if you wanted to get the Spanish residency since according to the Spanish Law on Entrepreneurs of 2013, if a foreigner invests in a project, as long as they can prove that it will have a positive effect on job creation, have a social or economic impact in the geographical area of ​​investment, or represent a significant contribution to scientific innovation and / or technology, they will be eligible to obtain it.

So an investment of this type may allow you to apply for a Spanish residence, by means of the so-called Spanish Golden Visa scheme. If you want to invest in Spain for residency, you can search among thousands of emerging business projects, and benefit from many tax advantages.

Converting this investment in a residence permit requires the approval of the competent Spanish authorities, so it is advisable that this is managed by a specialized and competent agent.

Invierta en una start up y obtenga la Spanish Golden Visa

March 24th, 2015

Invertir en una start-up española no sólo tiene numerosas ventajas fiscales, sino que  además puede abrirle las puertas para obtener la Spanish Golden Visa, es decir, el permiso de residencia en España.

Una compañía startup o, simplemente, compañía emergente, es un término utilizado actualmente para referirse a un proyecto empresarial el cual busca arrancar, emprender o montar un nuevo negocio y hace referencia a ideas que están empezando. Generalmente son empresas asociadas a la innovación, al desarrollo de tecnologías, al diseño web o desarrollo web.

Actualmente existen más de 3000 start-ups en España en las cuales se puede invertir. Con el objetivo de impulsar estos proyectos, el gobierno ha puesto en marcha cambios fiscales que favorecen la inversión en estas empresas. Pueden leer más aquí: las nuevas ventajas fiscales para inversores que han entrado en vigor este año . Incluso, si decide invertir como persona física ( y no como sociedad) se beneficiará de mayores deducciones y rebajas ( Invertir como persona física)

Todo esto son buenas noticias si usted quería obtener la residencia española ya que según la Ley de Emprendedores de 2013, si un extranjero invierte en un proyecto en el cual se pueda demostrar que el negocio va a tener un efecto positivo en la creación de empleo, o generar un impacto social o económico en la zona geográfica de la inversión, o si representa una contribución significativa a la innovación científica y / o tecnológica, puede obtener el permiso.

Así que una inversión de este tipo puede permitirle solicitar el permiso de residencia española, la llamada Spanish Golden Visa. Si quiere invertir en España para obtener la residencia, puede buscar entre más de 3000 proyectos empresariales emergentes, y apostar con las mejores ventajas fiscales.

Convertir esa inversión en un permiso de residencia requiere la aprobación de las autoridades españolas competentes, así que es conveniente hacer la gestión a través de un agente especializado y competente.

 

Desea Obtener La “Spanish Golden Visa”?

March 19th, 2015

Si aún se pregunta si cumple las condiciones para obtener la “Spanish Golden Visa,  le contamos cómo realizar una inversión para obtenerla

 

Una de las maneras de obtener un permiso de residencia en España es obteniendo una Spanish Golden Visa. Para ello debe hacer una inversión en España. Sin embargo, no vale cualquier inversión. Debe cumplir con los criterios expuestos en la Ley de Emprendedores de 2013 con el fin de que valga para obtener la residencia.

La primera, pero no la única manera de obtener el permiso es haciendo una inversión de capital. Y tal vez la inversión de capital más fácil, rentable y segura sea la inmobiliaria. Las condiciones son que debe utilizar al menos € 500.000 de sus propios fondos para empezar. Sin embargo, por encima de ese umbral no hay límite a la financiación de la deuda, por ejemplo, con una hipoteca en España.

Al hacer una inversión de este tipo, hay impuestos y tasas específicas hay que tener en cuenta.

  1. a) el IVA o la transferencia de impuestos: hasta un 10%
  2. b) Impuesto de Sellos, si procede: 1%
  3. c) Registro de la Propiedad, los honorarios notariales y legales: hasta el 2%

 

Por lo tanto, es importante tener en cuenta que para ser realmente capaces de asumir la inversión, a la cantidad total será necesario sumarle otro 13%.

Una alternativa a la adquisición de bienes inmuebles es la compra de acciones de una empresa española; en este caso la cantidad se eleva a 1.000.000 € o más. Otras opciones son depositar 1.000.000 € o más en una empresa financiera española o la adquisición de Bonos del Tesoro español por valor de 2.000.000 € o más.

 

Por último, también puede invertir en proyectos empresariales calificados como “de interés general”, si se puede demostrar que el negocio va a tener un efecto positivo en la creación de empleo, o generar un impacto social o económico en la zona geográfica de la inversión, o si representa una contribución significativa a la innovación científica y / o tecnológica. El permiso de residencia obtenida por este tipo de inversión requiere la aprobación de las autoridades españolas competentes.

 

Como ustedes saben, un permiso de residencia español le da acceso a todos los países “Schengen”, entre ellos Austria, Bélgica, Dinamarca, Finlandia, Francia, Alemania o Suiza, entre muchos otros.

Are you eligible for a Spanish Golden Visa?

March 18th, 2015

In order to obtain a Spanish Residency permit by means of the Spanish Golden Visa scheme, you must make an investment in Spain. However, not just any investment will do. It must comply with the criteria exposed in the Spanish Entrepreneurial Act of 2013 in order to make you eligible for the Residency.

The first but not the only way to obtain the permit is by making a capital investment. And perhaps the easiest, most profitable and secure investment is in real state. The conditions are that you must be using at least €500,000 of your own funds to start with. However, above that threshold there is no limit to debt financing, for instance with a mortgage in Spain.

When making an investment of this type, there are specific taxes and fees one must consider.

  1. a) VAT or transfer Tax: up to 10%
  2. b) Stamp Tax, if applicable: 1%
  3. c) Land Registry, Notary and legal fees: up to 2%

 

So, it is important to keep in mind that, in order to apply for the Spanish Golden Visa, the total amount needed will rise approximately another 13% in order to actually be able to make the investment.

An alternative to acquiring real state is buying Stock shares of a Spanish Company; in this case the amount rises to 1.000.000€ or more. Other options are depositing 1.000.000€ or more in a Spanish financial company or acquiring Spanish Treasury  Bonds worth 2.000.000€ or more.

 

Lastly, you can also invest in business projects classified as “of general interest” if you can prove that the business will have a positive effect in job creation, or make a social or economic impact in the geographical area of the investment, or if it represents a significant contribution to scientific and/or technological innovation. The residency permit obtained by this type of investment requires the approval of the relevant Spanish authorities.

 

As you know, a Spanish Residency permit gives you access to all “Schengen” countries, including Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, or Switzerland, amongst many others.

 

Los expertos piden una reforma fiscal equitativa y antifraude

March 18th, 2014

Excelente artículo analítico escrito por Ana Balseriro de “La Voz de Galicia” sobre la petición de expertos y agentes sociales de una reforma fiscal de alcance,  que solucione la falta crónica de capacidad recaudatoria, recupere la equidad, simplifique el sistema y reduzca la sangría del fraude.

El informe de la comisión de sabios que preside Manuel Lagares y que servirá de base a la reforma tributaria del Gobierno está listo. El ministro de Hacienda recibirá las conclusiones el jueves 13 y las elevará al Consejo de Ministros del 14, con una semana de retraso sobre lo anunciado inicialmente por Montoro.

Pero a la espera de las recomendaciones de la comisión Lagares, expertos y agentes sociales insisten -al hilo de los últimos anuncios de Rajoy- en pedir una reforma fiscal de alcance, que solucione la crónica falta de capacidad recaudatoria, recupere la equidad, simplifique el sistema y reduzca la sangría del fraude. «El margen de maniobra del Gobierno va a depender de si la economía despega con fuerza. Pero sería bueno que se revirtieran las medidas introducidas que están haciendo daño a contribuyentes y empresas. La crisis nos ha llevado a un estado de excepción tributario y hay que ponerle fin», resume Ricardo Gómez-Acebo, socio de Deloitte Abogados. Algunas propuestas de los expertos para los grandes impuestos se detallan a continuación:

IRPF

Deshojando la margarita de la rebaja impositiva. El vehículo recaudatorio por excelencia, el impuesto sobre la renta de las personas físicas (IRPF), divide a los especialistas, aunque hay consenso en reducir los tipos, al menos para las rentas más bajas. El centenar de expertos que integran el Consenso Fiscal que elabora semestralmente PwC y que acaba de publicarse bajo el título de Un punto de partida para la reforma fiscal, recoge la opinión de que hay que reducir la presión fiscal. «Lo primero que hay que hacer es crear un sistema que tenga una capacidad recaudatoria significativa y que esté bien gestionado», señala Ignacio Zubiri, catedrático de Hacienda de la Universidad del País Vasco, que resume los objetivos de la reforma en «depurar bonificaciones, cerrar vías de elusión y reducir el fraude», añadiendo que «inicialmente no deben aumentarse los tipos de los impuestos más importantes».

¿Mantener o no el sistema dual? En la misma línea de Zubiri está la batería de propuestas enviada por el sindicato de técnicos de Hacienda (Gestha) al ministerio, abogando, entre otras cosas, por «reducir los efectos contrarios a la progresividad derivados de la dualidad fiscal de las rentas del trabajo y del capital, excluyendo las ganancias especulativas del concepto de renta del ahorro», e incluyendo las rentas generadas en sicavs (vehículos de inversión de las grandes fortunas), fondos de inversión o sociedades instrumentales. Desde la CEOE, sin embargo, plantean mantener el sistema dual del IRPF con un tipo de gravamen único sobre el ahorro, mientras que piden eliminar el recargo adicional temporal que se aprobó para los años 2012 y 2013 y que se ha prorrogado este 2014. A favor de esta supresión también se posiciona Ricardo Gómez-Acebo, de Deloitte, por considerar que «aunque el IRPF ha sido de los impuestos que mejor han aguantado la crisis, en parte por la introducción del gravamen especial que elevó los tipos entre los más altos de Europa, a medio y largo plazo el efecto es perjudicial y no se mantiene la recaudación». También el recientemente fallecido David Taguas, en su última entrevista a La Voz, defendía un IRPF de tipo único (flat tax) con un mínimo exento «lo suficientemente elevado».

IVA

¿Subirlo o mantenerlo? Montoro aseguró que no se tocaría de nuevo. Sus palabras apagaron el incendio que provocó la filtración de que el comité Lagares propondría subir el IVA, algo sobre lo que este lunes volvió a insistir la presidenta del FMI, Christine Lagarde, en el Global Forum Spain de Bilbao. Desde el Registro de Asesores Fiscales (REAF) del Consejo General de Economistas defienden que se estudie la eliminación de algunas exenciones y de operaciones a tipo reducido, revisando los regímenes especiales. La patronal, por su parte, se opone a cualquier subida del impuesto y también «a desplazar bienes y servicios desde tipos reducidos al general», por entender que repercutiría en la ya debilitada demanda interna y comprometería la recuperación. Los sindicatos lo comparten. Zubiri defiende «depurar» los tipos reducidos porque tienen un coste elevado (más del 40 % de la recaudación) y sus ganancias de equidad son dudosas, ya que, en realidad, los ricos se ahorran más que los pobres. «Habría que tender, como en Dinamarca, a un sistema de tipo único con algunos bienes esenciales a tipo cero». Eliminar las declaraciones simplificadas y establecer mecanismos efectivos de lucha contra el fraude son propuestas de consenso.

Sociedades

Corregir la brecha entre el tipo nominal y el efectivo. Hay diversas opiniones. Gestha, por ejemplo, plantea establecer «uno o varios tipos impositivos superiores» para las bases imponibles positivas superiores al millón de euros. Así se nivelaría el tipo medio efectivo con las pymes y microempresas, a la vez que se eliminan los beneficios fiscales y la mayoría de las deducciones. Desde Deloitte Abogados, el socio en Galicia Fernando Vázquez defiende una «simplificación». «Se trataría de eliminar las deducciones que quedan» y reducir el tipo impositivo nominal para acercarlo al efectivo.

Otros impuestos

Nuevas fórmulas y lucha contra el fraude. Zubiri subraya que la forma de luchar contra el fraude es «haciendo que no sea rentable». Los expertos también plantean nuevas figuras impositivas, como clarificar la fiscalidad medioambiental o crear impuestos sobre la contaminación o las transacciones financieras.

Artículo original en:

http://www.lavozdegalicia.es/noticia/economia/2014/03/06/expertos-piden-reforma-fiscal-equitativa-antifraude/0003_201403G6P34992.htm

Fair Tax Mark to reward tax justice

February 24th, 2014

¨In this interesting article published by The Guardian and written by Craig Scott, the author discusses the relevance, pros & cos of the Tax Mark launching as a reward for transparency and fairness in corporate taxation practices and policies.¨

“In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” For many, Benjamin Franklin’s famous quote encapsulates everything we need to know about the inevitability of taxes. Yet over the past few years, it has become apparent that, for an increasing number of multinational companies, when it comes to tax, nothing is certain.

Google, Facebook and Amazon have all been criticised recently for the level of corporation tax they pay in the UK, but perhaps it was the US coffee giant Starbucks that attracted the most opprobrium when it was revealed in 2012 that the firm, at the time worth $40bn (£24bn), reportedly paid just £8.6m in corporation tax in the UK over 14 years.

These companies aren’t breaking any laws – they are simply taking advantage of the complexity of the corporate tax system.

Politicians are starting to act: plans were announced at last year’s G20 to close loopholes in the tax system. Public anger is also growing – in a recent survey commissioned by Christian Aid, 34% of Britons said they are currently boycotting a company because it does not pay its fair share of tax.

So how can the problem of corporate tax avoidance be tackled and the public’s understanding of the issue improved? At a recent roundtable discussion, hosted by the Guardian in association with Midcounties Co-operative, participants discussed the pros and cons of the Fair Tax Mark, which will launch today.

The Fair Tax Mark will use a set of metrics to assess companies on their tax and transparency. Companies that score a minimum of 13 out of 20 will be awarded a Fair Tax Mark. According to one of the directors of the Fair Tax Mark, Richard Murphy, the aim of the scheme is to allow companies who are paying the right amount of tax to stand out. “There are good companies in this world,” he said. “There are exemplars of good practice who are trying to pay the right amount of tax.”

How much is enough?

Yet for some participants, defining what the “right amount of tax” is could be problematic. “How do you pin down what a fair tax rate is?” asked Chas Roy-Chowdhury, head of taxation at the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants. “There are all sorts of dynamics that come into it; even tax experts wouldn’t necessarily agree with each other.”

For Murphy, “right” means that the “economic substance” of what a company is doing in a certain country has to be reflected in the tax it pays. If the company only has a “filing cabinet” in that area, rather than having staff, sales and assets there, yet is supposedly generating a vast amount of profit, “that looks like a tax arrangement”.

He went on to tell the roundtable how a system of awarding “bonus points” would ensure the Fair Tax Mark didn’t unfairly penalise companies that had paid a low rate of tax for legitimate reasons. If, for example, a firm was entitled to tax relief to offset investment in R&D, the rating would accommodate this – as long as these reasons were disclosed.

This bonus marking system went some way to allaying the concerns of a few participants who felt that an earlier iteration of the Fair Tax Mark was too simplistic in its approach to tackling tax avoidance.

There are many other legitimate reasons why a company would not have to pay the headline rate of tax, said Mike Truman, editor of Taxation Magazine. “If you are operating within the law you shouldn’t be penalised,” he stressed.

Ken Olisa, corporate director of Thomas Reuters, said the tax system was dealing with very complicated issues; if it was reduced to something simple, it could inflame the public with headline views and “damage business and democracy”.

Olisa believed encouraging companies to be transparent about their tax affairs was a better approach. “Let the public and media form their [own] views,” he said.

But some participants felt the public would embrace having an easy way to tell if a company was paying a fair amount of tax or not, without becoming swamped with information. “All consumers want to know,” said Robert Hodgkins of the ICAEW, “is has it passed, or failed?”

“We are only going to be giving the mark to people who want it … we are not going to stand in judgement,” said Murphy, who was keen to emphasise companies would have to apply to receive Fair Tax Mark accreditation. The standard wouldn’t be imposed on companies or its findings released without their consent.

This operating model is standard in ethical certification, said Paul Monaghan, director of Up the Ethics. “A business says, ‘I’m thinking of certifying my supply chain, can I have a proxy audit?’ You then get an initial report back and the conversation begins,” he said. Sometimes this leads directly to certification, he added, and sometimes improvements and tweaks need to be made before certification is granted.

“If companies are concerned they are going to be highlighted unfairly, then part of the response to that has to be better reporting,” said Jenny Ricks, head of campaigns, Action Aid. “The onus is on them.”

But if signing up to the Fair Tax Mark is voluntary, why would businesses choose to do so? Parallels were drawn with the Fair Trade movement and other consumer-awareness campaigns. “These things started off very small and now they dominate global markets – they have become really influential,” said Rob Harrison, another Fair Tax Mark director.

When the Co-op began championing Fair Trade products, said Ben Reid, chief executive of Midcounties Co-operative, rival supermarkets soon followed suit “as it was seen as a unique selling point for Co-op and was taking market share”. Reid added that Fair Tax was now attracting the same type of passion. He said the Co-op’s energy business picked up hundreds of new customers last year after a large energy supplier was accused of avoiding paying corporation tax for a number of years and it became the subject of a boycott campaign. If the Fair Tax Mark becomes relevant to like-minded consumers, businesses will adopt it and “that is why this is important”, he added.

Companies are “responding to public demand for change on this issue”, said Ricks. “This will be another tool to democratise the debate around tax.”

Public anger

Alasdair Roxburgh, campaigns manager, Christian Aid, took up this point. There is public anger over tax, he said, “but at the moment it is not particularly directed or fully formed”. Roxburgh thought the Fair Tax Mark offered an opportunity to help people understand tax as an issue: “We need to get better at communicating why tax is important,” he said.

This could also be mutually beneficial for businesses, said Richard Wilcox, managing director of Unity Trust Bank. He used the Living Wage as an example, pointing out that businesses who signed up to that initiative began collaborating to ensure mutual success. Businesses that sign up to the Fair Tax Mark were likely to do the same: “It has the ability to snowball,” he said. “There is a clear business benefit there.”

Murphy agreed: “When all businesses understand each other and there is mutual trust, we will create prosperity and that can be shared.”

Roundtable participants were clearly coming round to the merits of the Fair Tax Mark, but a number of contributors wanted to know more about its business model. Would it become another organisation that both draws up industry standards and gets paid to help companies meet them, asked Olisa, such as the Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS), which advises its clients on corporate governance. The danger in that is that shareholders have “handed over thinking” to the ISS, said Olisa, which can sometimes result in the organisation exerting an undue influence.

“It’s a paid-for standard,” admitted Harrison, but it will operate on a sliding scale “that will start on £200 for a tiny shop”. Half the fee will be charged for an assessment and then, if the assessment is passed, the company will pay the second half for a licence to display the mark which, he said, would be subject to annual assessment. Fair Tax Mark was a not-for-profit organisation, he added.

Other participants worried that the Fair Tax Mark would lose its relevance once the economy picked up. However, Oxfam’s economics justice policy adviser, Krisnah Poinasamy, said the effects of austerity “are going to last far longer than the implementation of it” and therefore the argument around “who is paying their fair share” would continue.

Olisa, who had voiced some reservations regarding the Fair Tax Mark, largely came around to the idea in the end, suggesting that if the scheme focused on “justice more than tax”, it could and should succeed. “The idea of tax justice, as a citizen, I find hugely attractive,” he said. “As a businessman, I find it hugely attractive. The only way we create wealth in society is through businesses and we have to operate in society, so it’s an easy argument.”

How does it work?

• The Fair Tax Mark aims to help organisations that apply for accreditation achieve maximum transparency and fairness in their taxation policies.

• A company’s publicly available information (website, annual accounts etc) will be examined to assess its transparency, tax rate, tax avoidance and tax disclosure.

• The criteria have been devised in consultation with NGOs, business representatives, industry practitioners and a seven-member technical team of academics and professionals. Development of the criteria is an ongoing process.

For up to date information on the Fair Tax Mark, visit fairtaxmark.net

At the table

Larry Elliott (Chair) economics editor, the Guardian

Ben Reid chief executive, Midcounties Co-operative

Paul Monaghan director, Up the Ethics

Rob Harrison director, Fair Tax Mark; editor, Ethical Consumer Magazine

Robert Hodgkinson executive director of technical strategy, Institute of Chartered Accountants

Richard Murphy director, Fair Tax Mark; founder, Tax Research LLP

Ken Olisa OBE corporate director, ThomsonReuters; chair, Restoration Partners

Krisnah Poinasamy economics justice policy adviser, Oxfam

Jenny Ricks head of campaigns, Action Aid

Alasdair Roxburgh campaigns manager, Christian Aid

Mike Truman editor, Taxation magazine

Chas Roy-Chowdhury head of taxation, Association of Chartered Certified Accountants

Richard Wilcox managing director, Unity Trust Bank

 

Source:

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/fair-tax-mark-to-reward-tax-justice

Forecast Suggests Increased Confidence In Spanish Property Market

February 20th, 2014

In this interesting article published by Tax News-Global Tax News and written by Ulrika Lomas, the author discusses how real seems to be the positive forecast of increasing possibilities for the Spanish property market for 2014.

A new report from the Urban Land Institute and PwC has found increasing investor confidence in the Spanish property market.

Sixty-seven percent of respondents who contributed to Emerging Trends in Real Estate Europe 2014 said that they believed there are now good opportunities in Spain, with the EUR162m acquisition of the Parque Principado mall in Oviedo by Intu and the Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board indicating mainstream interest in the market.

Joe Montgomery, CEO of ULI Europe, said that mainstream institutions were following opportunistic investors who entered the market when Sareb (a company which manages assets transferred by the four nationalized Spanish financial institutions) opened for business in 2013. However, he cautioned: “with limited signs of tenant demand and rental growth, questions remain as to how far the market recovery can go.” Skeptics warn that debt remains very hard to obtain, and that Spain is still a risky market.

The report also found 51 percent of investors seeing opportunities in Ireland, with Dublin transformed from a “no-go” location to “one of the hottest markets in Europe” in just two years.

Simon Hardwick, real estate partner at PwC Legal, said that there was “a battle for assets” underway, and that with intense competition over a limited supply in core locations in Europe, investors are having “to look at other opportunities and to accept more risk.” He added that the fast improving outlook for “non-prime” locations was evidence of this, but that PwC was “skeptical” that there would be a rush into the riskiest markets: “Investors’ interest remains focused primarily on sustainable returns from quality assets in good locations.”

Further, 71 percent of respondents believe that this will mean more equity for refinancing or new investment during 2014, in particular with increasing flow from sovereign wealth funds based in Asia. Fifty-one percent expect that debt for refinancing or new investment will increase, while only 15 percent expect it to become scarcer. However, there was no expectation of a return to pre-recessional levels, and southern Europe and the Benelux countries remain especially cautious.

The top five European real estate investment markets in 2014 are predicted to be Munich, Dublin, Hamburg, Berlin, and London.

Source:

http://www.tax-news.com/news/Forecast_Suggests_Increased_Confidence_In_Spanish_Property_Market____63526.html

Copyright © 2008-2010, León Fernando del Canto - Legal Notices - Contact Us. All Rights Reserved.Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).

International Tax Law Barrister, Lawyer, Abrogado & Attorney, Leon Fernando del Canto of Konsilia, offering services relating to international tax planning, tax advice, private clients, international law, serving Spain, United Kingdom, Europe.

Tax Precision is the trading name of León Fernando del Canto Gonzalez, a Barrister regulated by the General Council of the Bar in England and the Colegio de Abogados de Jerez de la Frontera.