The Spanish Supreme Court has agreed to hear an appeal from the Barcelona City Council regarding its controversial ‘Amazon Tax’, a municipal fee levied on large e-commerce delivery companies for their use of public space. The decision, revealed in six judicial orders from January, means the country’s highest court will now settle the legal battle after the High Court of Justice of Catalonia (TSJC) struck down the ordinance in July 2024.


Your browser does not support the video tag.

The case represents a critical test for municipalities seeking to regulate and generate revenue from the logistical operations of online retail giants. The tax, formally approved in February 2023 and implemented a month later, was designed to charge postal operators with an annual turnover exceeding one million euros a fee equivalent to 1.25% of their gross revenue generated in the city. The council projected it would raise up to €2.6 million annually to compensate for the “intensive use” of public roads for parking and deliveries.

The measure, however, immediately faced a unified legal challenge from a coalition of industry groups and competition watchdogs. Opponents included Spain’s courier association (Asociación Española de Empresas de Mensajería), logistics and transport organization UNO, the National Markets and Competition Commission (CNMC), and the Catalan Competition Authority, among others. They argued the fee was a “disguised tax” that lacked a proper legal framework, created legal uncertainty, and unfairly discriminated against online retailers.

In their challenge, the industry groups contended that the tax penalizes e-commerce companies while ignoring the delivery activities of traditional brick-and-mortar stores. The TSJC agreed with this argument, ruling in July that the ordinance “infringes the principle of free circulation of goods” and nullifying the tax.

The Barcelona City Council, however, has consistently defended the legality of the fee. The city argues that the scale and model of large-scale e-commerce logistics create a unique and “extraordinary use of the public domain” that is distinct from local businesses. In response to the discrimination argument, the council stated, “we are dealing with substantially different situations that therefore justify differential treatment.”

Following the lower court’s decision, First Deputy Mayor Laia Bonet expressed the administration’s stance: “We respect judicial pronouncements, but we clearly disagree with this one.” The city promptly appealed to the Supreme Court, a move that the high court has now accepted, citing the case’s wider legal relevance, according to reports from El Periódico.

Interestingly, the TSJC’s decision was not unanimous. A dissenting opinion from one magistrate supported the city’s position, arguing that the delivery activities organized by companies like Amazon Road Transport Spain do fall within the scope of postal services and that using gross income as a basis for the fee was a valid way to measure the intensity of public space usage.

Key Questions for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court’s ruling will hinge on several complex legal questions:

  • Fee vs. Tax: Is the charge a legitimate fee for a specific, intensive use of public space, as the city claims? Or is it an illegal, disguised tax that oversteps municipal authority? The city has invoked Supreme Court precedent that allows fees on bank ATMs for their use of public space, arguing the logic is “fully applicable.”
  • Discrimination: Does the tax unfairly target e-commerce and violate principles of equal treatment by exempting smaller operators (under €1M in revenue) and the national postal service, Correos? The TSJC found the inequality was not justified, while the city argues the impact of these smaller operators on public space is minimal.
  • Calculation Method: Is it lawful to base the fee on a company’s gross revenue? Opponents argue this links the fee to economic activity rather than the actual use of public space, a point the dissenting TSJC judge contested.

The tax ordinance was originally a key condition set by the Esquerra Republicana (ERC) party to support the city’s 2020 budget under the previous administration. Its journey to the Supreme Court marks another instance of a major Barcelona policy facing high-stakes judicial review, similar to the city’s regulation on popular consultations.

The outcome of this case will be closely watched by cities across Spain and Europe. A victory for Barcelona could pave the way for other municipalities to adopt similar measures to manage the logistical footprint of e-commerce, while a defeat would solidify legal barriers against such innovative, and controversial, fiscal policies.

Primary source: El Periódico Barcelona.