Spain’s “Beckham Law” was designed to attract international talent. But in practice, it has evolved into something more fragile: a regime that can be lost not only through obvious breaches, such as changing residence status, but through technical missteps in the architecture of income.
One such risk has worried inbound taxpayers for years: what happens when a Beckham taxpayer holds an interest in a foreign tax-transparent partnership, particularly a UK LLP?
In a binding ruling (Consulta Vinculante V1372-25, dated 21 July 2025), Spain’s tax authority has now provided a clear, fact-driven answer: a UK LLP does not, by itself, disqualify a taxpayer from the Beckham regime. The decisive issue is whether the partnership’s activity creates a Spanish permanent establishment (PE).
What this means in practice is the ongoing risk UK LLP partners moving to Spain must evaluate carefully: foreign partnership activity can trigger a Spanish PE based on real-world facts such as workspace, people, authority, and day-to-day conduct.
According to this binding consultation, a UKLLP does not generate a PE in Spain when it does not carry out any economic activity involving the management on its own account of the means of production of goods or services in Spain, and consequently, it does not carry out any activity with a presence in Spanish territory.
La “trampa de Beckham”: cuando los ingresos de empresas extranjeras se convierten en ingresos de capital privado español
Conforme a la actual formulación del régimen especial del artículo 93 LIRPF , la obligación tributaria española del contribuyente se determina por referencia a las normas del IRNR (Impuesto sobre la Renta de no Residentes) para las rentas obtenidas sin establecimiento permanente, con limitadas excepciones.
That technical architecture matters enormously. It means that Beckham is not compatible with income that would be treated as obtained through a Spanish PE. This is explicitly stated as a condition of the regime under Article 93.1.c) LIRPF.
In plain terms: the moment an inbound taxpayer is treated as having a Spanish PE, the Beckham regime is exposed.
This is where foreign partnerships become dangerous. If the partnership is transparent, the income is attributed directly to the partner. The question then becomes whether that income is being generated through an organisation of means in Spain.
For UK nationals considering relocation, this risk is particularly acute. Post-Brexit, British citizens are treated as non-EU nationals for tax purposes, and while the UK-Spain Double Taxation Treaty remains in force, certain limitations apply. This makes careful tax planning essential for professionals with complex income structures.
Spain’s Legal Lens: A UK LLP Can Be Treated as an “ERAR”
The DGT begins its analysis by addressing classification: whether the UK LLP is treated, for Spanish purposes, as an “entidad en régimen de atribución de rentas” (ERAR), a foreign entity analogous to Spanish income attribution vehicles.
The legal basis is Article 37 TRLIRNR, which extends the attribution regime to foreign entities of identical or analogous legal nature to those listed in Spanish law.
The ruling adopts the DGT’s own interpretative framework (Resolution of 6 February 2020) and confirms that a UK LLP can meet the core characteristics of an ERAR if:
- It is not subject to personal income tax in the state of constitution
- Its income is attributed to partners by mere generation (distribution is irrelevant)
- The income retains its nature in the hands of partners
On the facts presented, the DGT accepted that the UK LLP in question satisfied those requirements.
This point is crucial: Spain is willing to treat the UK LLP as transparent, but transparency is only the start of the analysis, not the end.
The Decisive Fork: Article 38 vs Article 39 TRLIRNR
Once the UK LLP is treated as a foreign attribution entity, Spanish law forces a binary classification.
Route One: Article 38 TRLIRNR
If the foreign attribution entity develops an economic activity in Spain on a continuous or habitual basis, through premises, workplaces, or through an agent with authority to contract, then it falls into the framework of Article 38 TRLIRNR. This effectively pulls the income into a PE-type category.
Route Two: Article 39 TRLIRNR
If, however, the entity merely obtains Spanish-source income without that organisational footprint, the applicable rule is Article 39 TRLIRNR, and the members are taxed without PE.
This is where V1372-25 delivers its most useful message: the UK LLP does not create a Spanish PE merely because it is transparent.
The distinction is everything. One route preserves Beckham eligibility; the other destroys it.
What the Ruling Actually Holds (And Why It Matters)
The taxpayer in V1372-25 was Spanish resident and had opted for Article 93 LIRPF regime. They held an interest in a UK LLP established in 2011, and the LLP’s activity and structure were described as entirely UK-based.
The DGT’s conclusion was unequivocal: in accordance with the two previous articles (38 and 39 TRLIRNR), the form of taxation will differ depending on whether or not an economic activity is carried out in Spanish territory.
In this line, art. 27 TRLIRNR establishes that income from an economic activity derives from the taxpayer organising the means of production and human resources for the purpose of participating in the production or distribution of goods or services.
Because the LLP did not have the Spanish footprint as described above, and consequently, did not carry out any activity with a presence in Spanish territory within the meaning of Article 38, Article 39 of the TRLIRNR would apply. In this case, the partners of the entity would be considered taxpayers without a permanent establishment in Spain. Consequently, the taxpayer did not breach the Beckham condition in Article 93.1.c LIRPF and could maintain the regime.
In other words, the regime is lost by Spanish PE activity, not by foreign transparency.
The Real Compliance Message: “Presence” Beats Form
The practical implication of this ruling is significant, especially for UK LLP partners planning a move: the practical PE risk does not disappear just because the LLP is “transparent” for Spanish purposes. The decisive factor is whether the LLP’s business is being carried on in Spain through an organisational footprint in the real world.
Inbound taxpayers should stop obsessing over legal labels and instead build a rigorous, fact-driven analysis of what Spanish law actually cares about: workspace, agent authority, and what is being done day-to-day.
Key questions to address:
- Is there a fixed place of business in Spain connected to the LLP (office, premises, or dedicated facilities)?
- Is there a habitual workspace in Spain used for LLP activity (including a regular home-office setup used to run LLP work)?
- Is there a dependent agent in Spain with authority to contract on behalf of the LLP (and is that authority used in practice)?
- What activities are actually performed in Spain, by whom, and how routinely (client work, management, negotiations, signing, billing, etc.)?
For international professionals relocating to Spain, this becomes increasingly relevant. Spain’s 2023 reforms widened access to Article 93, including categories such as remote workers and entrepreneurs, making it more likely that inbound taxpayers will have foreign partnership income alongside a Spanish relocation.
The irony is striking: a regime designed to attract global talent can be destabilised by something as mundane as where work is actually performed.
Red Flags vs Green Flags: A Practical Framework
Based on V1372-25 and the underlying legal provisions, here’s what taxpayers and their advisors should be monitoring:
Green Flags (Beckham-Compatible)
- UK LLP has no premises, staff, or assets in Spain
- All LLP activities conducted outside Spain
- Partner performs no contracting authority in Spain on behalf of LLP
- Clear documentation of UK-centric operations
Red Flags (Beckham at Risk)
- Partner regularly works from Spain on LLP matters
- LLP has Spanish clients serviced from Spain
- Partner signs contracts in Spain on behalf of LLP
- Any suggestion of a “habitual” Spanish workspace for LLP activity
The burden of demonstrating compliance falls on the taxpayer. In cross-border matters involving international tax complexity, contemporaneous documentation is essential.
The Bottom Line
V1372-25 is not a revolution. It is something rarer in Spanish tax practice: a technically coherent clarification.
A UK LLP can be treated as a transparent attribution entity for Spanish purposes, but Beckham regime survives only as long as the LLP does not create a Spanish PE through premises, habitual activity, or contracting authority in Spain.
For inbound taxpayers, the lesson is simple: the Beckham regime is not defeated by structure. It is defeated by facts. And for UK LLP partners relocating to Spain, the practical risk is ongoing: foreign partnership activity can still be seen as carried on in Spain, creating a Spanish PE, even where the LLP is transparent, if the day-to-day reality supports that conclusion.
Because PE analysis is intensely fact-specific (and small operational details can change the outcome), every case requires a bespoke assessment by qualified Anglo-Spanish tax legal professionals. A robust review should be grounded in evidence of how and where work is performed: workspace arrangements, authority to negotiate or sign, who interacts with clients, and what is done in Spain on a routine basis, not just the legal structure on paper.
Need personalised advice on Beckham Law, UK LLPs, and Spanish PE risk? Del Canto Chambers has dual-qualified, multilingual Anglo-Spanish tax and legal expertise to manage this nuanced risk. If you’re planning a move (or already working from Spain), get in touch for a confidential, fact-led review of your specific setup.
