Go back to News
NEWS
Javier Vinuesa: about 720 | El Confidencial
28 of January, 2022
Our tax partner, Javier Vinuesa, collaborates in this article of El Confidencial on the increase of regularizations and claims against the State after the European setback to 720. In particular, Javier mentions:
“The ruling collects all the legal grounds that we have alleged in the open proceedings on this issue. First, the TJEU has confirmed that the 720 regulation is contrary to the free movement of capital. This is important, because it implies that the judgment deploys its effects with respect to investments in other Member States, but also with respect to assets located in third States.”
“We appreciate that the TJEU prevents the questioning of statutes of limitations that have already expired. We have had several cases in which unjustified capital gains have been settled with respect to assets where there was no doubt that they had been acquired in prescribed tax periods. This proof to the contrary only existed in the Spanish rule with respect to assets located in Spain, but did not apply to assets located abroad. From now on, the same rules will apply regardless of where the assets are located”.
El Confidencial
“The ruling collects all the legal grounds that we have alleged in the open proceedings on this issue. First, the TJEU has confirmed that the 720 regulation is contrary to the free movement of capital. This is important, because it implies that the judgment deploys its effects with respect to investments in other Member States, but also with respect to assets located in third States.”
“We appreciate that the TJEU prevents the questioning of statutes of limitations that have already expired. We have had several cases in which unjustified capital gains have been settled with respect to assets where there was no doubt that they had been acquired in prescribed tax periods. This proof to the contrary only existed in the Spanish rule with respect to assets located in Spain, but did not apply to assets located abroad. From now on, the same rules will apply regardless of where the assets are located”.
El Confidencial
Press contact
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
Director of Business Development, Marketing and Communications
More information about
Gómez-Acebo & Pombo
03 Mar, 2026 
PUBLICATION
03 Mar, 2026
Legal doctrine of the UPC’s Court of Appeal on the patent invalidity defence: is the way in which the ‘long arm’ is applied compatible with the UPC's own Rules of Procedure?
The Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court has ruled that a patent invalidity defence cannot be raised before the Unified Patent Court, with only a counterclaim being possible. This calls into question the way in which the ‘long arm’ is being applied with regard to European patents validated in States that are not party to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA), whether or not they are members of the European Union, since no counterclaim for revocation or plea of invalidity as a defence can be filed or raised with regard to such patents. This raises significant doubts about the compatibility of how the ‘long arm’ is applied in the Unified Patent Court system, given its own Rules of Procedure.
03 Mar, 2026 
PUBLICATION
26 Feb, 2026
A restructuring plan sanctioned in England and Wales that modifies debt subject to German law has no effect in Germany
Recognition of UK restructuring plans remains a contentious issue in the European Union. This decision by the Frankfurt am Main Regional Court is controversial, but it raises questions about the consequences of the application of the rule in Gibbs by the courts of England and Wales in this context.
26 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
26 Feb, 2026
Pharma & Healthcare No. 47
The newsletter covers the main developments in Pharma & Healthcare legislation and case law.
26 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
23 Feb, 2026
Irregularities in public sector staffing. Jurisdiction and/or substantive law
When a serious irregularity is found in administrative contracts owing to their employment character, jurisdiction lies with the employment branch of the court system. However, if the administrative route is not outside the scope of the law, jurisdiction lies with the judicial review branch of the court system.
23 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
17 Feb, 2026
Squeeze-out of minority shareholders following successful mandatory takeover bid: rebuttable presumption of fair consideration
The Court of Justice of the European Union (Fifth Chamber), in its judgment of 27 November 2025 (Case C-567/24, Svema Trade), concerning the equitable price in a squeeze-out requiring minority shareholders to sell their shares to an offeror who, following a mandatory takeover bid, has acquired more than 90% of the capital carrying voting rights in the company subject of the takeover bid, states that the presumption that the price offered in the bid, in the context of such a squeeze-out of holders of securities, is equitable is rebuttable.
17 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
13 Feb, 2026
Senior management, membership of the board of directors and insolvency proceedings: single association theory yes, but also employer-employee relationship
Despite classifying the association as a commercial relationship and not an employment relationship, compensation amounts for termination of contract are allowed if they match those accepted by the insolvency practitioners, just as remuneration amounts are allowed if said practitioners had decided to accept remuneration in some months but not in others.
13 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
10 Feb, 2026
Application of Austrian law to liability in tort of directors of Maltese company offering online games of chance in Austria
The CJEU clarifies two important issues regarding the application of the Rome II Regulation: the scope of the exception relating to corporate matters and the determination of the place of damage in the case of games of chance offered via the internet from one Member State in another Member State without the licence required in the latter Member State.
10 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
09 Feb, 2026
Notarial enforcement of pledges. Is Article 1872 of the Civil Code mandatory? In what sense?
The clause agreed upon must comply, for greater certainty, with the provisions of the new judicial enforcement procedure. It will be necessary to agree on an appraised value, which is not required in Article 1872 CC, because otherwise the award would be similar to a ‘forfeiture proviso’ (pactum commissorium), which the Civil Code neutralised with the drastic imposition of extinguishment of the debt in its entirety.
09 Feb, 2026
PUBLICATION
06 Feb, 2026
Automotive and Sustainable Mobility No. 29
Summary of legislative and jurisprudential developments relating to the automotive sector.
06 Feb, 2026