Housing has become the main concern of thousands of young Spaniards, who see their dream of becoming independent in their own home as an increasingly difficult challenge to achieve. Faced with this situation, many parents are considering the option of donate your home to your childrenso that they can have a house without going through the buying and selling process. However, this might not be the best option.
The expert lawyer in inheritances and taxation, David Jiménez, has explained on his Instagram profile the two must have options take into account those parents who are considering donating their habitual residence to their children or another family member, since they could lose their right to reside there in case any conflict occurs. To avoid this, it is necessary to take into account two important terms: usufruct and bare ownership.
Difference between usufruct and bare ownership
The first is a real right in which the usufructuary can use and enjoy a certain asset while the usufruct lasts. However, you cannot dispose of it, so you could not sell it but you could rent it, for example. This right generally occurs in the case of inheritances and can be voluntary, legal, temporary or for life. While Bare ownership grants ownership of the property which is at the disposal of the usufructuary, so he cannot use it until the usufruct period ends.
Therefore, people who can fully enjoy the home would be the usufructuariesalthough the ownership belongs to those who have bare ownership. This differentiation is essential to ensure that parents or family members who are considering donating can take it into account and guarantee the use of the home in case there is any problem or conflict of interest.
David Jiménez recommends donating only the bare property, “for what may happen”
Therefore, when considering a possible donation, there are mainly two scenarios: donate one hundred percent of the home or have the owners ensure usufruct and only donate the bare property. In the first case, the owners decide to hand over the entire home to their children or relatives, allowing them to enjoy it and use it as they wish. However, this option is not highly valued by the lawyer, since ““The one who has the right to use and enjoy the house would be your son.”.
What David Jiménez recommends is that the owners of the home donate only the bare property and keep the usufruct. This fact will make your children or family members the owners of the homebut they may continue to have the right to use and enjoy the home whenever they wish since the new owners will not have the right to use it. “In this way, by reserving the usufruct for yourself, “It would be you, exclusively, who has the right to use and enjoy that good.”.
On the other hand, we must also take into account the tax factorsince the child or family member who will receive the bare property must pay municipal capital gains. As for the owner, he, as usufructuary, must pay the income tax on the transfer of bare ownershipunless you are exempt or do not have to pay personal income tax. However, it is an interesting option if you want to guarantee the right to use your home, “because then life changes and you don’t know what is going to happen.”