Four experts appointed by the Government endorse banning speculative housing purchases

BarcelonaWhen the president of the Generalitat, Salvador Illa, opened the door to banning speculative housing purchases in Catalonia, he did so with some caution: "It needs to be studied carefully and we need to proceed with certainty," he argued. when the CUP first raised the issue in ParliamentFinally, it was the Comuns party that secured a commitment from the government to sit down at a working group meeting with four experts to study the issue.

Now, after three months and four different reports, the experts have issued a unanimous verdict: it is legal and "constitutional" to veto speculative housing purchases through urban planning legislation, the exclusive competence of the Generalitat (Catalan government), if done temporarily and in areas with high demand. The Comuns party has celebrated this and is calling for "political will" from the PSC (Socialist Party of Catalonia) to move forward. At a press conference this Saturday, the leader of the Comuns in the Catalan Parliament, Jéssica Albiach, stressed that this is an "indispensable" condition if Salvador Illa's government wants their votes to approve the budget. The four reports are signed by Carles Viver Pi-Sunyer, former professor of constitutional law and former Constitutional Court judge, who was also director of the Institute for Self-Government Studies; Fuensanta Alcalá, a legal expert in urban planning with ties to the Barcelona City Council; Jaime Palomera, a researcher at the Barcelona Urban Research Institute; and Pablo Feu, an expert in administrative law and professor at the University of Barcelona, ​​who was, in fact, the author of the first report on the Barcelona Metropolitan Strategic Plan (PEMB), which paved the way for this measure. These four reports complete the quartet of experts that the Barcelona en Comú party has been using to demand that the government take action and, within six months, commit to legally prohibiting all purchases aimed at profiting from housing. Albiach lamented that the government is finding it so difficult to "move" on this issue, despite the experts' endorsement. "We're stuck," he said, regarding the budget negotiations.

Jessica Albiach's party was already registered a few months ago. a bill in Parliament to empower local councilsThrough urban planning, the government sought to prohibit all home purchases unless the buyer intended to live in the property, following the formula outlined in its report. The objective was to halt the acquisition of apartments by investors attracted by the high profitability of real estate, which has risen to 12% in the last 15 years, by tightening market access conditions for individuals. The proposal included some exceptions, such as the possibility of acquiring a second home in a different municipality than the primary residence, or purchases for a close relative. It effectively excluded companies from the market but allowed the purchase of entire buildings if they were subsequently offered as affordable rentals. The Comuns party has given the Catalan government six months to reach a consensus on a proposal and submit it to Parliament, where they want it to be processed through a single reading so that it can come into effect before August. They rule out, however, demanding its implementation via a decree-law, something Feu also anticipates in his report. The CUP has presented a separate initiative on the same issue, but it is keeping it separate from the budget negotiations. This Saturday, at an event on housing, the leader of the PP in Catalonia, Alejandro Fernández, directly attacked market intervention measures, which he sees as detrimental to the right to private property: "Private individuals cannot be the ones who, with their properties, guarantee the right to housing for others," he complained. In any case, Comuns and the Catalan Government will continue their negotiations in a new meeting this Monday, the fourth since they began discussing the budget.

Constitutionality

Now, is it constitutional to limit the right to private property by prohibiting the purchase of real estate based on its intended use? This is one of the questions Viver Pi-Sunyer has attempted to answer, concluding that the Constitution does empower the legislature to restrict this right as long as it does not render it meaningless. He points out that this already occurs with the housing law and measures such as the rent cap. He bases this on the right to housing recognized in the Constitution, but also on the fact that, according to the Constitution, the right to private property is limited by its "social" function. For his part, Feu justifies resorting to administrative law to combat the "urban planning dysfunction" generated by a real estate market that displaces residents and fails to guarantee access to housing. Another major question raised by the regulation of the Comuns—also within the Catalan Government—is whether the Generalitat (Catalan Government) has the authority to prohibit purchases for speculative purposes. This is another point addressed by Viver Pi-Sunyer. While it is true that the State has exclusive jurisdiction over civil law and the foundations of contracts, he argues, it is also true that the Generalitat (Catalan government) holds exclusive jurisdiction over urban planning, and that the Constitutional Court has given the green light to tangentially affecting rights such as property rights in their exercise. "It is accepted that an autonomous community, within its housing jurisdiction, can enact administrative law regulations governing material areas also regulated by the state legislature within its jurisdiction over civil law," he points out. For all these reasons, he predicts that the regulation would pass the Constitutional Court's scrutiny if challenged by the opposition or the State.

Sanctions, key

In her report, legal expert Fuensanta Alcalá emphasizes the need to introduce a sanctions regime to guarantee the effectiveness of the limitations: this is what, in legal jargon, is called "urban planning discipline." The expert acknowledges the risk of the regulation being challenged as a possible "covert regulation" of real estate sales, but counters this by stressing that it "does not regulate relationships between private individuals," but simply "conditions the functional use of a property based on its urban location." "The application of clear and predictable disciplinary regimes does not destroy the real estate market, but rather reduces speculative pressure in the short term and redirects investment toward models compatible with stable residential use," maintains Alcalá, who sees it as compatible with European law.

Palomera expresses a similar view, noting, however, that this measure must be part of a broader set of actions aimed at guaranteeing the right to housing. These actions should include everything from tax measures to penalize property hoarding to strengthening the inspectorate. He also proposes "recovering homes diverted to non-residential uses" and allocating more funding to expand the public housing stock. Regarding the limitation of speculative purchases, the expert emphasizes that similar measures have been implemented in Denmark, the Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland, and Singapore. In the fiscal sphere, for example, the Commons and Government They already agreed last year to raise taxes on large property owners.