Taxation of bonuses and share plans with multi-year vesting under the Beckham regime

Introduction

The international executive who moves to Spain and elects the special regime of article 93 LIRPF rarely receives linear, predictable remuneration. His compensation package includes, with increasing frequency, variable elements whose generation extends over time: a bonus remunerating the financial year preceding his arrival, share options granted years before the move whose vesting period has barely begun, or deferred consideration linked to the sale of a corporate shareholding. Each of these instruments raises one and the same fundamental question: to what extent is it subject to taxation in Spain under the Beckham regime?

The answer is not uniform and depends, in each case, on whether the income derives from activity carried out in Spain, outside Spain, or in both territories during the instrument's generation period. Article 114.2.a) RIRPF is the key provision: it excludes from the regime income derived from activity carried out prior to the move, unless the TRLIRNR treats it as obtained in Spanish territory under some autonomous connecting factor.

This note analyses the two forms of variable remuneration most frequently encountered in the practice of the international executive who has elected the special regime: the bonus for the financial year preceding the move and share-based remuneration plans with a multi-year vesting period. For each of them, the administrative criterion in force, its practical implications and the questions that remain open are examined.

The bonus for the financial year preceding the move

The most frequent scenario and, paradoxically, the one that generates the greatest confusion in practice is that of the annual bonus. It is common for an executive who moves to Spain in January of a given year to receive, in the first months of the year, the bonus corresponding to the preceding financial year, which remunerates work carried out entirely outside Spain. The question whether that amount must be included in Modelo 151 has had an answer since binding ruling V1112-25, of 11 December 2025.¹

In the case analysed, the taxpayer moved to Spain on 1 January 2024 and elected the special regime. In January 2024 she received from her employer the bonus corresponding to the 2023 financial year, a year in which she had resided and worked in Israel. The DGT concludes that that bonus is not subject to taxation in Spain. The basis is the exception in article 114.2.a) RIRPF: the income derives from activity carried out entirely prior to the date of the move and, since article 13 TRLIRNR does not treat it as obtained in Spanish territory either, it falls outside the perimeter of charge of Modelo 151.

The underlying rule is clear: what matters is not the moment at which the bonus is paid, but the period to which the remuneration corresponds. A 2023 bonus received in 2024 does not become Spanish income by reason of the fact that the taxpayer already resides in Spain when it is paid. The date of economic accrual of the income, tied to the period of activity that it remunerates, is the determining factor. This distinction, which appears conceptually straightforward, is disregarded with notable frequency in practice, with the result that amounts which should never have appeared in it are included in Modelo 151.

The same logic applies, mutatis mutandis, to the multi-year bonus. If the bonus remunerates activity carried out partly before and partly after the move, the charge in Spain will be proportionate to the fraction of the reference period during which the taxpayer was already working in Spanish territory. The absence of an express binding ruling on this scenario makes it advisable to document with precision the bonus calculation criteria and the period to which each tranche is attributed.

Share-based remuneration plans with multi-year vesting: the apportionment criterion

The taxation of share-based remuneration plans, stock options, restricted stock units (RSUs) and performance shares under the Beckham regime has been the subject of a significant doctrinal evolution which culminated, favourably for the taxpayer, in binding ruling V0813-23, of 5 April 2023.²

Until that date, the DGT's position, reflected in ruling V0610-22 and endorsed by the Audiencia Nacional in its judgment of 15 February 2023,³ was that the entirety of the income derived from the exercise of acquisition rights during the Beckham period had to be treated as obtained in Spain, with no possibility of apportionment by reference to the generation time elapsed outside the territory. V0813-23 marked an important shift: the DGT adopted the proportionate criterion and expressly recognised that only the fraction of the income corresponding to activity carried out since the move is taxable in Spain.

The facts of V0813-23 are those of a Spanish executive who had resided and worked outside Spain without interruption since 1994, his final years of residence having been in the United Kingdom. He moved to Spain during the second half of 2020 to work for a Spanish subsidiary of the group and elected the special regime. Since 2010 he had participated in a share plan with a three-year vesting period: at the end of each three-year cycle, if the targets had been met, the employee was entitled to receive shares in the group free of charge or at a reduced price.

The DGT concludes that the income derived from the exercise of those rights during the Beckham period does not derive from activity carried out entirely prior to the move, given that the vesting period spans time worked both outside and within Spain. Consequently, the exception in article 114.2.a) RIRPF does not apply in its entirety, but only in the proportion corresponding to activity preceding the move. The part corresponding to activity carried out since arrival in Spain is subject to the special regime under article 93.2.b) LIRPF.

The apportionment methodology that follows from the criterion in V0813-23 requires the complete chronology of the plan to be reconstructed: identifying the grant date, the vesting period, the days worked in each country during that period and the exercise date. The ratio of days worked in Spain to the total days of the vesting period determines the fraction of the income reportable in Modelo 151. The remainder, corresponding to activity performed outside Spain, in principle falls outside the regime, although it must be verified whether the TRLIRNR brings it into charge under some autonomous connecting factor.

The practical application of this criterion requires the adviser to hold, prior to the filing of Modelo 151, the complete documentation of the plan: the plan rules, the grant documents, the vesting conditions, the good leaver and bad leaver provisions and the identification of the granting entity. The payslip and the offer letter are insufficient. A plan granted by a foreign parent may have vesting conditions that are not reflected in any document of the Spanish employing subsidiary, and the relevant information must be obtained directly from the group's compensation function.

Interaction with double taxation relief mechanisms

The partial charge on variable remuneration in Spain does not, of itself, eliminate the risk of double taxation. The fraction of the income corresponding to activity carried out outside Spain may have been taxed in the country of origin or in the taxpayer's previous country of residence, and that tax paid abroad may give rise to a credit against the liability in Modelo 151.

Article 114.2.b') RIRPF provides for an international double taxation credit applicable to employment income obtained abroad, subject to a limit of 30 per cent of the part of the gross liability corresponding to the whole of the employment income obtained in that tax period. The credit requires the tax paid abroad to be evidenced, which in the case of share plans may present practical difficulties where the withholding has been applied by the parent in the country of origin and is not reflected in any document issued to the employee by the Spanish subsidiary.

V0813-23 expressly recognises the applicability of this credit to the part of the stock option income corresponding to extraterritorial activity which is nonetheless brought into charge in Spain under some connecting factor of the TRLIRNR. Evidencing the tax paid abroad is, in practice, the most frequent obstacle: the adviser must anticipate the need for this supporting document and obtain it from the group's compensation function sufficiently in advance of the filing of Modelo 151.

Concluding considerations

Variable remuneration with an international component is not an incidental element of the inbound worker's tax position: in many cases it is the most significant item in his remuneration package and the one that presents the greatest tax risk. The two instruments analysed, the bonus and share plans, share a characteristic that makes them particularly prone to error: their generation extends over time and crosses borders, so that the simplistic attribution of the entirety of the income to the period of payment, or to the period of residence in Spain, systematically produces incorrect results.

The administrative criterion in force, built on V0813-23 for share plans and V1112-25 for the bonus, offers a reasonably clear framework for the analysis. What that framework demands is not so much an effort of interpretation as an effort of documentation: reconstructing the chronology of each instrument, identifying the period to which the activity generating it corresponds, and obtaining the documentation of the plan or remuneration agreement sufficiently in advance.

In our experience, the review of variable remuneration must be carried out at the time of onboarding the inbound client, not as the filing date for Modelo 151 approaches. By that point, the data necessary for the apportionment should already be available, the tax paid abroad should be evidenced and the withholdings applied by the employer should have been calculated using the correct method. When these elements are addressed for the first time in June, the room for manoeuvre is minimal and the risk of error maximal.

Notes

1. Dirección General de Tributos, binding ruling V1112-25, of 11 December 2025.
2. Dirección General de Tributos, binding ruling V0813-23, of 5 April 2023.
3. Dirección General de Tributos, ruling V0610-22; Audiencia Nacional, judgment of 15 February 2023.

Lullius is a tax boutique based in Palma de Mallorca specialising in international tax, private wealth and tax litigation. The authors are contributing authors of the Spain chapter of The Legal 500 tax litigation guide (Tax Disputes Comparative Guide 2026).

Legal notice. This article is provided for general information only. It reflects the position as at August 2026 and does not constitute legal or tax advice, nor does it create a lawyer-client relationship. No action should be taken, or refrained from, on the basis of its content without specific professional advice on the particular facts. Lullius accepts no responsibility for any loss occasioned by reliance on this material.