B Law & Tax
08 May 2023

Tax advisor: The possibility of seizure of the 200 euros subsidy for people with low incomes is discussed

The Directorate General of Taxes has analyzed the possibility of garnishing the 200 euro subsidy aimed at low-income individuals following a recent binding consultation.  The starting point is article 169.5 of the General Tax Act, which indicates that goods or rights that are considered unseizable by law, as well as those whose sale cost could exceed the value that would normally be obtained from their sale, will not be subject to seizure. It then refers to article 605 of the Civil Procedure Act (LEC), where a list of absolutely unseizable assets is established, which includes those assets that have been expressly declared as unseizable by some legal provision. It is for this reason that a legal regulation is needed to consider the 200 Euros allowance as unseizable, and this is not the case.

The consultation is focused on the possible limitations at the time of the practice of the seizure. Article 607 of the LEC is the one that regulates the garnishability of public benefits, pensions, etc.

Aids with limitations to the seizure

– Economic aids established by the autonomous communities to provide a minimum insertion income to people who do not have sufficient economic resources to subsist.

– Aids established by the autonomous communities and local entities, which are designed to attend to groups at risk of social exclusion, situations of social emergency, basic needs of minors or people with disabilities who do not have sufficient economic means.

– Aid and benefits granted by the State with a similar purpose to those mentioned above.

– Aid granted to victims of violent crimes according to Law 35/1995 and Organic Law 1/2004, as well as public aid to victims of gender violence by virtue of said condition.

Thus, the Directorate General of Taxes concludes that the attachability regime for benefits that are increased would also apply to increases received in such benefits to compensate for price increases. This is because the increase due to the price increase does not have a differentiated character with respect to the benefit itself that is increased. It also applies to salary increases due to price increases, such as those resulting from salary review clauses that are linked to inflation. In these cases, the part of the salary increase that is due to inflation compensation follows the same rules of attachability as the normal salary, since it is part of it.

Following the reasoning, the same solution should be applied to the aforementioned aid, so it would also be subject to the seizure limits established in article 607 of the LEC.

B Law & Tax International Tax & Legal Advisors.


“En B LAW&TAX somos especialistas en asesoramiento fiscal internacional tanto a empresas como para particulares. Si desea ampliar la presente información, estaremos encantados de poder atenderle en el 917817194 o en [email protected]