Main grounds
Formal legislative reservation
The choice of the assessment method directly affects the VPT, which constitutes the IMI tax base and thus integrates the objective incidence of the tax. As the law does not clarify when the general formula is “inadequate”, it is the Ministry of Finance that, through an Ordinance and in an innovative way, defines the types of properties subject to the method in a matter reserved to Parliament.
Substantive legislative reservation
Article 46, paragraph 2, of the IMI Code merely names the method. Neither the IMI Code nor the Ordinance establish its elements or valuation criteria, unlike the general formula, whose factors are developed in Articles 39 to 44. As stated by the Constitutional Court: “the law names the applicable method, but does not contain the normative criteria that shape its application.”
Arguments dismissed
The Constitutional Court did not accept the parallel with Judgment No. 70/2004 (ISP rate set by ordinance within legal limits), because here the law sets no boundaries whatsoever. The Court also considered irrelevant the delimitation of what is taxed (towers and foundations, excluding blades and rotor), as it concerns the subject of assessment and not the method.
Supreme Administrative Court jurisprudence
The Constitutional Court dismissed decisions of the Supreme Administrative Court favorable to the Tax Authority, as they pertain to the legality under ordinary law and not the constitutional compliance of the rule itself.
Potential impact of the decision
Wider scope
The decision produces effects only in the specific case. However, the foundation of substantive legislative reservation affects Article 46, paragraph 2, of the IMI Code itself, thus questioning VPT assessments made using the cost method added to the value of the land, not only of wind farms, but also solar parks, dams and other power generation centers, as well as other properties listed in the Ordinance (stadiums, swimming pools, golf courses, among others).
Opportunities
Owners of these assets may review the assessments regarding IMI, AIMI (if applicable), and IMT and consider, within legal deadlines, the appropriate means of reaction: second assessment, administrative complaint, or judicial challenge. Future assessments may also be contested.
Risks and points of attention
The Tax Authority issued, in July 2026, a circular insisting on the application of this method to wind and solar power generation centers, so it is expected to continue applying it. The effects depend on the timely reaction of each taxpayer: expired deadlines may mean the consolidation of assessments. Legislative intervention should also be monitored.
Next steps
The decision justifies an analysis of potentially affected assessments, as well as the deadlines still in progress and the means of reaction that may be appropriate in each case.
