Melilla, navarra and the basque country, 0.50%. The debate began with a meeting by the tax coordination commission. A body in which all the finance ministries of the different autonomous communities participate. And although it was not a topic for discussion, the community of the canary islands asked to discuss the tax . The supreme court ruling established in the first instance that the bank should pay the tax . But a day later , the president of the supreme court issued a change in favor of the banking entities.
Most important doubts about the supreme court judgment customers who were going to acquire a mortgage or who had the thought of acquiring it, were not aware of the conditions in which they were going to make the purchase of the same. And much whatsapp number list less who should be the subject that would assume this cost, due to the "indecision" of the supreme. The supreme court ruling on the ajd caused a great economic and social repercussion in our country. But specifically, a "stagnation in demand" for mortgages due to the aforementioned.
Inesem business school master in appraisals and real estate valuations more information why did the customer pay the tax? Many of the people of our country raised the above question. The problem is that article 68 of the tax regulations has not mentioned in any section that the tax is paid by the borrower . And for this, the supreme court is forced to take a "step back" on its previous rulings. What is certain is that the client must pay because the tax regulations say so , not because of what the bank establishes. This aspect is very important, because consumers believed that it was an aspect of the bank. Imagine the situation in which there is an agreement regarding a deed. The financial entity uses as a commercial incentive that it is