The relationship of Spaniards with taxes shows signs of gradual wear, but far from the risk of rupture. The few data provided by official bodies point to a slight deterioration in the perception of the tax system, although still far from the years of greatest apathy, back in the worst of the financial crisis. Where a somewhat more marked rebound in disaffection is observed is among young people, the segment of the population that, by far, admits to showing the most hostility towards the tax system. It is a feeling that grows in the heat of doubts about justice and an increasingly uncertain future.
Read more How should Europe respond to Iran
According to figures handled by the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IEF), dependent on the Ministry of Finance, 93.6% of those over 65 consider taxes necessary, a percentage that falls to 75.4% among taxpayers aged 25 to 39 and to 67.9% among young people aged 18 to 24. The difference is not minor and points to a weaker relationship with the tax system among those who should support it in the future.
The Center for Sociological Research (CIS) shows a similar snapshot. Its latest survey, from July 2025, reflects that 30% of Spaniards are close to the following statement: taxes are something the State forces us to pay without really knowing what in return. It is the highest percentage in more than 10 years, although still far from the peak reached in 2014, of 38%. In recent years, the number of respondents who feel they receive less in public benefits than they pay in taxes has also grown. In both cases, the younger layers, especially males, take center stage.
This aversion does not arise so much from a frontal rejection of the concept of taxes as from a much more complex combination of factors. The data from the IEF and CIS, combined with reflections from several experts, point to a range of explanations that go from a growing sense of injustice in the system to increased uncertainty about the future. Added to these are a disconnection between what is paid and what is received and, as has become usual in countless phenomena, the effects of misinformation.
“There is a fairly widespread idea that the system is not progressive enough and that the effort is not distributed fairly,” explains Sara Torregrosa, Ramón y Cajal researcher at the Public University of Navarre. The latest IEF fiscal barometer confirms this: 83% of citizens believe that the tax burden falls more on low and middle incomes than on high incomes and large companies. In addition, 55% consider that the relationship between taxes paid and services received is worse in Spain than in other European Union countries. For years, the CIS has also recorded that a large majority perceives that taxes are not collected fairly. The sum of these perceptions creates a clear breeding ground for distancing.
That feeling of injustice is, for experts, one of the keys to understanding the general disconnection and the growing generational gap. María Cadaval, professor of Economics at the University of Santiago, points to a high perception of lack of equity in the system and doubts about how public services are perceived. The willingness to pay taxes, she maintains, is closely linked to that feeling, and when it is not considered fair or the return is not appreciated, support suffers.
In the case of young people, that perception combines with structural factors. Torregrosa emphasizes that the welfare state has a clear generational dimension, with a significant weight of items such as pensions or healthcare, much more focused on the elderly. Although the system works under a life cycle logic — that is, more is contributed at some stages and more is received at others — this loses strength when expectations weaken.
And that is one of the central elements in the diatribe. Young generations have grown up in a context marked by successive economic crises, job insecurity, and difficulties accessing housing. “They have lived through two major crises,” Cadaval recalls, which conditions their way of relating to institutions. The idea of contributing today in exchange for protection years down the line weakens when that future is perceived as uncertain. That is, the lack of expectations and lower trust in the role of the State end up also transferring to the fiscal realm.
Read more Peridis: the PP goes through the hoop
Torregrosa emphasizes the same line by pointing out that trust in the system largely depends on long-term expectations. “If you perceive that certain levels of protection or welfare will not be guaranteed, the redistributive logic loses credibility,” she points out. The result is a more distant relationship with taxes, especially among those who have not yet fully experienced the benefits of the model.
Added to these factors is the lack of information and fiscal education, which affects the entire population. Violeta Ruiz Almendral, professor of Financial and Tax Law at Carlos III University of Madrid, warns that the debate about taxes has gained visibility, but not always in terms that help understand the system. The presence of simplified or partial messages contributes to generating an incomplete view, in which what she defines as “half-truths” proliferate. The experts also focus on misinformation and lies coming from certain public profiles who usually reside in Andorra, whose channels are essentially consumed by young audiences.
In that context, it is difficult to build a solid perception. The complexity of the tax system, combined with the fragmentation of the public debate, favors biased interpretations that feed discontent. The lack of connection between what is paid and what is received also contributes, an idea that appears recurrently in surveys.
Jesús Ruiz-Huerta, director of Public Policies at the Alternatives Foundation, emphasizes precisely that lack of depth in the treatment of the fiscal debate. He recalls that, in general, a majority of citizens, although it may be decreasing, still considers that taxes are necessary to finance public services, although that idea is not always highlighted. In his opinion, the problem is that the focus is often on partial or interested views, which prevents conveying a complete picture of the system and its functioning.
That leads some to put forward opinions such as that the public treasury robs the taxpayer or false statements such as that the tax burden in Spain is higher than in the European Union. “Radical statements are made without thinking and without relating revenues to the expenses they finance. It is true that these are minority positions, but their growth and dissemination should be a concern,” Ruiz-Huerta maintains.
Strengthening that connection appears as one of the keys to reducing disaffection. In that sense, José María Durán, director and researcher at the Barcelona Institute of Economics and professor at the University of Barcelona, highlights the importance of making the cost of public services visible. He points out that, in most cases, citizens do not know how much healthcare, dependency, or public university costs. Making that information explicit, for example, when someone goes to a hospital or obtains a scholarship, would help to value the role of taxes in everyday life.
Cadaval also believes so. “Every year I teach classes at the university to young people and, when the real value of taxes is explained, their perception changes a lot.” Ruiz-Huerta, in turn, proposes giving more explanations about the intense connections between revenues and expenses. “For example, if a tax cut is proposed, it would be essential to justify it, expressing the corresponding cuts on the expense side,” he adds. The numbers would allow building the narrative of taxes as support for the public. Every year, Fedea publishes a report showing that, roughly, 60% of the population with lower income is a net beneficiary of public intervention, while the households of the other 40%, the richest, are net contributors.
Read more Flavita Banana: relative time
