ADVERTISEMENT
Decided on Tuesday, published in the BOE on Wednesday, brought into force on Thursday – and blocked by Parliament on Friday: Spain’s far-reaching housing reform has had an unusually short life. The Congreso refused to grant the necessary approval to both decrees.
It took just four days for Spain’s new housing reform to go from being approved by the Council of Ministers to being rejected by parliament.
On 29 September The government passed two Real Decreto-ley on housing and tenancy policy. The main package, RDL 26/2026, was published on 30 September in the Spanish Official State Gazette (BOE) and came into force on 1 October came into force. One day later, the Congreso refused to grant the required ratification.
The following voted in favour of RDL 26/2026 172 MPs in favour and 178 against. The second decree, RDL 27/2026, also failed because 166 votes in favour and 184 against.
The chronology is unusual:
29 September: The Council of Ministers adopts two decrees on housing.
30 September: RDL 26/2026 will be published in the BOE.
1 October: The package comes into force.
2 October: Congress refuses to confirm the appointment.
In Spain, a Real Decreto-ley may come into force immediately on grounds of particular urgency. However, under Article 86 of the Spanish Constitution, the Congreso must decide within 30 days whether to ratify or repeal it.
In the case of this package, the decision was taken the very next day after it came into force.
Nevertheless, one should not refer to it as „Spain’s shortest law“. There is no reliable historical comparison to support this. What is certain, however, is that: For a legislative package of this scale, its lifespan in Parliament was exceptionally short.
The first decree was wide-ranging. It combined tenant protection with tax changes, measures to curb certain property transactions and measures to increase the supply of affordable housing.
The government was thereby attempting to bring together the various parties within its parliamentary base. However, Junts decided against the package. The Catalan party argued that the measures could further reduce the supply of rental accommodation and, at the same time, did not go far enough in tackling large property funds.
Also The PP and Vox voted against RDL 26/2026. Before the vote, the government had offered to approve the decree for the time being and then allow it to be further debated in parliament. That was not enough to secure a majority.
At the same time, it failed RDL 27/2026.
This second, considerably shorter decree was intended to provide greater protection for long-term residential tenancy agreements and to make it easier to renew them.
This package, too, failed to secure a majority. This means that not only has the major reform package failed, but so too has the attempt to introduce separate new regulations governing the continuation of existing tenancies.
For tenants and homeowners on the Costa Blanca, the most important consequence is clear from the outset: The new provisions set out in RDL 26/2026 are not intended to be permanent.
This means that the new regulations, which had only just been introduced, are no longer applicable in cases such as seasonal lettings, room lettings and other tenancy law matters.
Particularly when it comes to holiday lettings, i.e. seasonal lettings, this is relevant. The decree had introduced significantly stricter requirements and imposed tighter regulations on proving a genuine need for temporary accommodation.
Following its rejection by the Congreso, the legal situation prior to this reform now applies once again, unless another existing provision applies.
Das bedeutet allerdings nicht, dass befristete Mietverträge automatisch problemlos zulässig wären. Schon vor RDL 26/2026 war entscheidend, welchem tatsächlichen Zweck das Mietverhältnis dient und ob es sich wirklich um einen vorübergehenden Aufenthalt oder faktisch um den gewöhnlichen Wohnsitz handelt.
Eine juristisch interessante Frage bleibt: Was passiert mit Verträgen, Ansprüchen oder anderen Rechtsvorgängen, die während der kurzen Geltungsdauer des Dekrets entstanden sind?
RDL 26/2026 war seit 1. Oktober tatsächlich geltendes Recht. Die Ablehnung durch den Congreso bedeutet nicht automatisch, dass das Dekret rückwirkend so behandelt wird, als hätte es nie existiert.
Welche Folgen für einzelne Verträge, Steuerfälle oder andere Vorgänge bestehen bleiben können, hängt von der jeweiligen Regelung und vom konkreten Sachverhalt ab.
Wer genau in dieser Übergangsphase einen Mietvertrag abgeschlossen, verlängert oder verändert hat, sollte die konkrete Rechtslage prüfen lassen.
Politisch ist das Thema mit der Abstimmung keineswegs erledigt.
Junts kündigte nach der Abstimmung an, der Regierung einen eigenen Vorschlag für ein neues Wohnungsdekret vorzulegen. Damit ist wahrscheinlich, dass zumindest Teile der jetzt gescheiterten Reform erneut verhandelt werden.
Für Mieter, Vermieter und Eigentümer an der Costa Blanca heißt das zunächst: Die Reform ist gescheitert, die politische Debatte über Saisonmieten, Mieterschutz und Wohnungsangebot geht aber weiter.
Stand: 2. Oktober 2026
Sources: Congreso de los Diputados; BOE, Real Decreto-ley 26/2026 und 27/2026; aktuelle Abstimmungsberichterstattung vom 2. Oktober 202
ADVERTISEMENT
