Spanish Supreme Court Annuls Short-Term Rental Single Registry Due to Lack of State Competence

The Supreme Court Judgment of May 19, 2026 partially upholds the appeal filed by the Valencian Regional Government and invalidates the single registration procedure created by Royal Decree 1312/2024, although it maintains the digital single window and the data transmission obligations of online platforms.

On May 19, 2026, the Third Chamber of the Spanish Supreme Court delivered a judgment (appeal 143/2025) that represents a significant setback for the State’s strategy regarding short-term rentals. The High Court partially upholds the administrative appeal filed by the Valencian Regional Government and annuls several key articles of Royal Decree 1312/2024, of December 23, which regulated the single registration procedure for rentals and created the Digital Single Window for Rentals.

The judicial decision, which has already generated an intense debate on the distribution of powers between the State and the Autonomous Communities, recognizes, however, that the General State Administration may maintain the digital single window and the data transmission obligations of online platforms, fundamentally for statistical and coordination purposes.

Context: The fight against the lack of reliable information

The judgment starts from an undeniable reality: the constant increase in short-term rentals through digital platforms is reducing the supply of traditional rentals and making access to housing more expensive in cities. This phenomenon, the Court warns, generates “problems of access to housing and the progressive displacement of habitual residents to other areas, with the consequent impact on the lives of citizens and on the social composition and neighborhood cohesion of certain districts.”

To address this situation, Regulation (EU) 2024/1028 of the European Parliament and of the Council of April 11, 2024, on the collection and exchange of data relating to short-term accommodation rental services, established harmonized rules for registration systems and data exchange. The objective was to provide public authorities with reliable data on the volume of these accommodations, the identity of hosts, and the location of the units.

The Spanish State approved Royal Decree 1312/2024 to adapt to this European regulation. It did so, however, by creating a single registration procedure of a national nature linked to the property and movable property registries, which overlapped with the already existing regional registries (especially those created for the regulation of tourist rentals). This overlap was the main focus of the competence conflict.

The Core of the Decision: The State cannot impose a single registry

The central question resolved by the judgment is whether the State had the competence to regulate this single registration procedure. The Supreme Court successively analyzes the competence titles invoked by the Government and rejects them one by one.

1. Civil legislation and organization of public registries (Article 149.1.8 CE)

The Court recalls the constant constitutional doctrine that reserves to the State the organization of registries of a civil and commercial nature (Property Registry, Commercial Registry, Movable Property Registry). Outside these areas, the creation of administrative registries corresponds to the ownership of the material competence in question (housing, tourism, environment, etc.). In this case, the registration in the Property Registry provided for by the Royal Decree was not intended to register a lease contract or any real right, but simply to obtain a registration number to be able to advertise the property on online platforms. Therefore, the Chamber concludes, “the competence title of Article 149.1.8 CE is not a suitable title to regulate a procedure and a registration of these characteristics.”

2. Bases and coordination of the general planning of economic activity (Article 149.1.13 CE)

The judgment admits that the Royal Decree pursues legitimate aims, such as verifying whether a property is subject to any prohibition by the homeowners’ association. However, it considers that this aim does not justify the creation of a single national registry that overlaps with regional registries. The Court notes that some Autonomous Communities have already established mechanisms to prove compliance with horizontal property regulations (for example, through responsible declarations or certifications from the homeowners’ association). It adds that the Council of State itself, in its opinion on the draft bill, already warned that the State lacked the competence to create a single registry, although it admitted the possibility of establishing a system that would guarantee the interoperability of regional registries.

3. Basic conditions guaranteeing equality of Spaniards (Article 149.1.1 CE)

The Court recalls the doctrine of the Constitutional Court that this competence title “must be used prudently” to avoid altering the distribution of powers. State competence is limited to establishing essential basic conditions to guarantee equality, not to exhaustively regulate a matter. In this case, the Royal Decree is not limited to establishing basic conditions, but rather deploys a “detailed regulation on registration in a national registry that seeks to provide information to Public Administrations to allow them to develop their public policies.” This exceeds what is permitted by Article 149.1.1 CE.

4. Statistics for state purposes (Article 149.1.31 CE)

Finally, the Chamber also rejects this title as a basis for the single registration procedure, since “it does not have a direct relationship with said provisions.”

Consequently, the judgment declares the nullity of articles 1 (in the part referring to the registration procedure), 2.f), 2.i), 2.j) (regarding registration procedures), 5, 6 (regarding the single registration procedure), 8, 9, 10, 12.b) and c), the second additional provision, the first final provision (regarding the competence titles to regulate the single registration procedure), and any other provisions or mentions referring to the single registry contained in the Royal Decree.

What is saved: The digital single window and data exchange

However, the judgment is not a global dismissal. The Supreme Court dismisses the appeal of the Valencian Regional Government regarding the digital single window, the coordination of windows, the data transmission obligations of online platforms, and the sending of information for statistical purposes. On these points, the State does have competence.

The Chamber reasons that the digital single window (Article 7 of the Royal Decree) and the coordination between administrations are subsumable under the coordination competence held by the State with respect to the different Autonomous Communities in the exercise of their competences in housing and tourism matters. These provisions, moreover, are required by the same Regulation (EU) 2024/1028 to guarantee data interoperability and facilitate joint and efficient access to information.

Regarding the obligations to transmit data for statistical purposes (Article 11), the Court bases them on the State’s competence regarding statistics for state purposes (Article 149.1.31 CE). This provision allows the transmission of aggregated and anonymized data on short-term rental activity to national (INE), regional, and European (Eurostat) bodies.

A lesson on the distribution of powers

The judgment of the Supreme Court of May 19, 2026, is a clear example of how the judicialization of housing policies is defining the limits of action of different levels of government. While sharing the purpose of the regulation (obtaining reliable information to combat the adverse effects of short-term rentals), the Supreme Court considers that the State exceeded its powers by imposing a single registry that practically annulled the pre-existing regional registries.

The decision now opens a period of regulatory uncertainty, but also an opportunity for the State and the Autonomous Communities to coordinate their respective registration systems without violating the distribution of powers. The digital single window and data exchange, which remain intact, can be the basis for a cooperative model that respects regional competences in housing and tourism and, at the same time, provides administrations with the information they need to design effective public policies.

The Barcelona Chair of Housing Studies will continue to follow the evolution of this issue, which directly affects the right to housing, social cohesion, and the capacity of administrations to regulate an increasingly dynamic and opaque market.