The Canarian Association of Vacation Homes (Ascav) has accused this Tuesday the Government of the Canary Islands of intending "to carry out substantial modifications that further worsen the conditions that owners will have to suffer" in the sector.
A Bill (PL-0013) for the streamlining of the processing of urban planning licenses is the way through which the Executive attempts that modification, which does so, furthermore, through "a series of amendments in relation to a tourism matter that has nothing to do with the initial object of the norm," assures Ascav in a statement.
Organization that states that those amendments were introduced "once the Bill fell to parliamentary seat" and that, "in addition to the absolute disconnection regarding the object, the introduced amendments significantly alter the legal regime of a typology of tourist accommodations in the Canary Islands".
Ascav points out that, "therefore, it considers it fundamental that the Consultative Council once again issue a mandatory legal report, although not binding," since "already in an opinion, 99/2019, the Consultative Council ruled on this matter, therefore, to approve a norm, there must be a connection between the norm to be approved and the amendments introduced, which is not the case."
The employers' association maintains that "an amendment cannot serve as a mechanism to give life to a new reality, which must be born from a, also, new initiative, according to a ruling by the Constitutional Court (4/2018)".
Ascav states that "the changes proposed by the Government group go so far, that they even invade state competencies, such as determining that all rentals shorter than 31 days will be declared tourist rentals, even if they are not", and adds: "what's more, this precept obliges the landlord not only to request information from the tenant, but also to verify and justify it."
And adds that "sanctions are also added for non-compliance that range between 1,501 and 30,000 euros".
When -he/she/it states- "the displacement of workers for short duration to the Archipelago, short stays for studies, rentals for filmings on the islands or even displacements, especially from the smaller islands to the capital ones for health reasons, in no case can be considered nor justify rentals that are touristic in themselves."
Ascav's conclusion is that "these changes should go again to the Consultative Council of the Canary Islands, since a Law for the Streamlining of Urban Planning Licenses is being used to substantially modify the regime for tourist rental of homes, which has nothing to do with the Bill being processed".