PORTUGAL Trends and Developments Contributed by: Tânia de Almeida Ferreira, CCA Law Firm
The enabling framework also points to a multiyear eli - gibility window (with objective project “start” markers). In particular, it references applicability to works where the procedural initiative begins between 25 Septem - ber 2025 and 31 December 2029, with VAT becoming chargeable up to 31 December 2032. In parallel, the housing package is built around the proposed Investment Contracts for Rental (CIA), and published analysis of the draft indicates the CIA regime is expected to produce effects from 1 June 2026 (a relevant milestone because the reduced VAT strand is legislatively positioned alongside CIA type incentives). Compliance mechanics and allocation of risk (where disputes may arise) From a VAT/technical standpoint, the measure is framed around works contracts ( empreitadas ). This is an important limitation: it pushes market partici - pants into contract structuring and documentary proof around the nature of the service, the eligible residential purpose, and affordability caps. Equally important, the authorisation anticipates ex post controls and clawback logic. It specifically con - templates situations where the buyer does not allo - cate the property to their main home or (even if they do) does not remain in the property for at least 12 months, subject to statutory exceptions. This design shifts the real economic risk to eligibility and monitoring covenants, robust audit files evidenc - ing compliance with the “moderate” thresholds, and the contractual allocation of the VAT benefit (and any clawback exposure) between developers/contractors and end buyers. Anti-abuse safeguards and audit focus Given that eligibility is conditional upon objective affordability caps and project-specific criteria, the reduced-rate framework is likely to be administered applying a strong compliance lens. In practice, the Portuguese Tax Authority is expected to scrutinise: (i) artificial fragmentation of contracts or project phases; (ii) mischaracterisation of supplies (eg, re-labelling works to fit within the empreitada perimeter); and (iii) arrangements designed to remain formally within
price/rent thresholds without reflecting the economic reality of the transaction. For developers and contrac - tors, contemporaneous documentation (contracts, licensing, budgets, pricing assumptions and evidence supporting the moderate thresholds) will be central to mitigating audit and clawback risk. Market implications (what matters for investors and developers) The reduced rate measure is most economically rel - evant where VAT on construction is a real cost (eg, where output transactions are VAT exempt and input VAT is not fully recoverable). Where input VAT is broadly recoverable, the effect is typically less about the headline rate and more about cash flow timing (depending on whether the final mechanism operates via an upfront reduced rate or a refund/deduction architecture). Finally, even if implementation is smooth, construc - tion lead times mean the measure is unlikely to deliver immediate supply-side outcomes. Market commen - tary has flagged that legal clarity and workable admin - istrative procedures will be critical to avoiding distor - tions and disputes (particularly for multiyear projects straddling implementation dates). Use of Collective Investment Companies (SICs) in Real Estate: Conversions, Tax Profile and Evolving Policy Focus Why SICs are showing up more often in real estate structures Within the Portuguese regulated investment frame - work, SICs (corporate form collective investment undertakings (OIC)) can be used to hold real estate portfolios, including in closed ended alternative real estate strategies. In practice, a notable trend has been the conversion of existing joint stock companies ( sociedades anónimas ) into SICs to access the OIC tax framework and a fund-like regulatory perimeter. Conversion and transfer taxes: binding rulings point to neutrality, but with caveats Recent binding rulings issued by the PTA have con - firmed that the conversion of a joint stock company ( sociedade anónima ) into a SIC, per se, does not trig - ger IMT nor Stamp Duty, on the basis that no transfer
369 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook