DGT V2574-25 confirms benefit-in-kind exemptions apply to Beckham Law employees

Companies with internationally relocated employees operating under Spain's Special Expatriate Tax Regime (Article 93 LIRPF) — commonly known as the Beckham Law — have long faced a practical question: do the standard benefit-in-kind exemptions of Article 42.3 LIRPF continue to apply once an employee opts into the regime? A new binding consultation answers that question definitively, and the answer is yes.

The Dirección General de Tributos (DGT) published consulta vinculante V2574-25 on 18 December 2025, confirming that all the Article 42.3 LIRPF benefit-in-kind exemptions — canteen and meal services, childcare for the first education cycle, health insurance, and transport — are fully available to employees taxed under the Beckham Law. The ruling resolves a technical doubt that had generated uncertainty in HR and payroll departments of multinational employers across Spain.

The Beckham Law tax framework

The Special Expatriate Tax Regime, codified in Article 93 of the Spanish Personal Income Tax Law (LIRPF), allows qualifying individuals who become Spanish tax residents to elect to be taxed under the rules applicable to non-resident income tax (IRNR) rather than under the general IRPF rules. The regime was significantly expanded by the Startups Law (Ley 28/2022), which extended it to new categories of qualifying activity including digital nomads, highly qualified professionals, and entrepreneurs.

The fundamental mechanism of the Beckham Law is this substitution: instead of being taxed as a Spanish resident, the taxpayer is taxed as a non-resident on Spanish-source income only, at a flat 24% rate on the first €600,000 of employment income (47% on the excess). This creates the well-known tax advantage of the regime. But it also raises a technical question: if the taxpayer is taxed under IRNR rules, do IRPF-specific provisions — such as the benefit-in-kind exemptions in Article 42.3 LIRPF — still apply?

Article 93.2 LIRPF addresses this directly by providing a set of special rules that apply alongside the IRNR framework. Among those special rules is Article 93.2.a), which creates a specific carve-out for certain work-in-kind income.

The question — do IRPF benefit-in-kind exemptions survive?

The consultation was filed by a company that employs staff under the Beckham Law regime. The company had implemented a flexible remuneration plan covering four categories of benefit: canteen and meal services (both direct employer-canteen and indirect formula via meal vouchers or cards), childcare for employees' children in the first education cycle with third-party authorised providers, health insurance covering the employee, their spouse, and dependent children, and employer transport contributions.

The company asked the DGT whether employees on the Beckham Law regime could benefit from the Article 42.3 LIRPF exemptions for each of these four benefit categories. The underlying legal doubt was genuine: since Beckham Law taxpayers are taxed under IRNR rules — not IRPF rules — there was a technical argument that Article 42.3 LIRPF, an IRPF provision, might not be accessible to them. If that argument had succeeded, flexible remuneration plans would have needed to be restructured for Beckham Law employees, with significant HR and payroll consequences.

The DGT answer — yes, via the Article 14.1(a) TRLIRNR chain

The DGT's answer was a clear and unambiguous yes. The legal reasoning follows a three-step chain that the DGT articulated carefully in the ruling.

The first step is Article 93.2.a) LIRPF, which states that Beckham Law taxpayers are exempt from Spanish tax on "work-in-kind income referred to in letter a) of Article 14.1 of the IRNR consolidated text" (Real Decreto Legislativo 5/2004, TRLIRNR). This provision creates an explicit bridge from the Beckham Law regime to the IRNR framework.

The second step is Article 14.1.a) TRLIRNR, which sets out the income exempt from non-resident tax. That provision exempts "income mentioned in Article 7 and work-in-kind income mentioned in paragraph 3 of Article 42 LIRPF received by individuals." This is the critical link: Article 14.1.a) TRLIRNR explicitly incorporates Article 42.3 LIRPF by reference.

The third step follows automatically: because Article 14.1.a) TRLIRNR brings in Article 42.3 LIRPF, and because Article 93.2.a) LIRPF brings in Article 14.1.a) TRLIRNR, Beckham Law taxpayers have access to all the Article 42.3 LIRPF exemptions. The DGT confirmed this for each of the four benefit categories raised in the consultation.

Canteen and meals

The exemption for canteen and meal services under Article 42.3.a) LIRPF applies in two forms. The direct formula — where the employer provides meals in a company canteen or through a third-party catering service — is exempt without monetary limit (subject to reasonable-value conditions). The indirect formula — meal vouchers, restaurant cards, and equivalent electronic systems — is exempt up to the regulatory limit, currently €13.33 per working day.

The DGT confirmed that both formulas are available to Beckham Law employees. Importantly, the ruling also confirmed that the indirect formula applies equally to employees working remotely (teletrabajo), a point that had been clarified in earlier guidance but was reaffirmed here in the Beckham Law context. Days on which the employee works remotely and uses a meal voucher continue to qualify, provided the daily limit is observed.

Childcare

The Article 42.3.b) LIRPF exemption covers the provision of childcare services for employees' children in the first education cycle (ages zero to three), either directly through an employer-operated nursery or through vouchers or payments to authorised third-party childcare providers. There is no monetary cap on this exemption; the full cost of qualifying childcare is exempt.

The DGT confirmed that this exemption is available to Beckham Law employees on the same basis as regular IRPF taxpayers. The key requirements are that the child must be in the first education cycle (prior to the start of compulsory education), and the provider must be duly authorised. Internal company nurseries, external nurseries, and flexible remuneration childcare voucher systems all qualify.

Health insurance

Article 42.3.c) LIRPF exempts employer-paid health insurance premiums up to €500 per year per covered person (employee, spouse, and each dependent child). For covered persons with a disability recognised at 33% or more, the limit is €1,500 per year. Premiums exceeding these limits are treated as taxable remuneration in the ordinary way.

The DGT confirmed that Beckham Law employees can benefit from this exemption. The limits apply per person, so a family of four (employee plus spouse plus two dependent children) can shelter up to €2,000 per year in health insurance premiums (or more if disability thresholds are met). Given the cost of international private health insurance for relocated executives, this exemption is often material.

Transport

Article 42.3.f) LIRPF — as renumbered following successive amendments — provides an exemption for employer contributions to public transport used by the employee for the home-to-work commute, up to €1,500 per year per employee. The exemption covers both direct payments to public transport providers and indirect formulas such as transport cards or vouchers provided under a flexible remuneration scheme.

The DGT confirmed the full availability of this exemption to Beckham Law employees. As with the canteen exemption, both direct and indirect formulas qualify. The €1,500 annual cap applies across all transport contributions for a given employee, regardless of the modality used.

This ruling removes a genuine source of operational uncertainty. Companies had been designing flexible remuneration plans with a question mark over their Beckham Law employees. Now there is no question mark. The legal chain is clear, the DGT has confirmed it, and HR can proceed on that basis. — DPLL Tax & Legal · Editorial commentary, May 2026

Practical implications for HR and payroll

For HR and payroll professionals, the practical implications of V2574-25 are immediate and favourable. Existing flexible remuneration plans do not need to be restructured to exclude Beckham Law employees; those employees can participate on the same terms as regular IRPF employees, subject to the same monetary limits.

There are, however, a few implementation points worth noting. First, the Beckham Law has its own income tax return — Modelo 151 — which differs from the standard Modelo 100 used by regular IRPF taxpayers. The benefit-in-kind exemptions must be correctly reflected in Modelo 151. The exempt amounts are not included in the taxable base, but the payroll system must be configured to track them separately and report them accurately on the employee's annual tax certificate.

Second, the employer's withholding obligations under the Beckham Law differ from those under general IRPF. The Beckham Law withholding rate is a flat 24% (on income up to €600,000), applied to the net taxable remuneration — which now clearly excludes the Art. 42.3 exempt amounts. Payroll systems that were previously including those amounts in the Beckham Law taxable base should be corrected prospectively, and the company should assess whether prior years may require any adjustment.

Third, documentation is essential. The DGT's confirmation is binding for substantially identical situations, but companies should ensure they can demonstrate that the benefits provided fall within the qualifying categories and monetary limits. For health insurance, this means retaining the policy documents and premium invoices. For childcare, it means retaining the childcare provider's authorisation certificate. For meal vouchers, it means retaining the issuer's documentation confirming the regulatory status of the system. For transport contributions, it means retaining records of the transport card or voucher amounts per employee per year.

Fourth, companies with employees at different stages of the Beckham Law election cycle — some who have elected the regime, some who are eligible but have not yet elected, and some who are not eligible — will need to ensure that their payroll system can handle these different tax treatments simultaneously. This is standard practice for multinationals in Spain, but V2574-25 resolves one of the more opaque edges of that configuration.

For Beckham Law employees and their employers, the combined effect of the four exemptions confirmed in V2574-25 can be meaningful. A single employee with a spouse and two dependent children, using all four benefit categories at their respective limits, can shelter approximately €5,500 per year in exempt remuneration (€13.33/day × ~220 working days ≈ €2,933 for meals; €500 × 4 covered persons = €2,000 for health insurance; €1,500 for transport; plus uncapped childcare), with the actual saving depending on the applicable marginal rate within the Beckham Law flat-rate structure.

Employers structuring compensation packages for incoming relocations under the Beckham Law should include these exemptions as a standard element of their remuneration design. The Modelo 149 registration and subsequent annual Modelo 151 filing will need to reflect the remuneration structure correctly. If you are designing a compensation package for a relocating employee or need to review an existing Beckham Law payroll configuration, a specialist consultation with a tax adviser experienced in the regime is the recommended first step.