The municipal executive approved on Wednesday, by majority, with nine votes in favor from Inov25 – Isaltino Inovar Oeiras 25 and one from Chega, and one against from PS, the proposal by the vice-president of the municipality, Francisco Rocha Gonçalves, concerning the Municipal Property Tax (IMI) for 2025, to be settled in 2026.
The proposal, scheduled for the Municipal Assembly on Tuesday, sets the “IMI rate at 0.8% for rural properties and 0.45% for urban properties,” with an increase “of 30% on the IMI rate applicable to degraded urban properties” and “a triple rate increase on idle or ruined urban properties for over a year.”
According to the municipality’s tax benefits regulation, there is also “a 20% reduction in the IMI rate applicable to urban properties rented for housing, provided that the monthly rent does not exceed the average accessible rent values.”
IMI rates are annually set by the Municipal Assembly, within the legal limits of 0.8% for rural properties and 0.30% to 0.45% for urban properties, and compared to neighboring municipalities of Oeiras it has been noted “a reduction in the rate in all municipalities, except Lisbon, which always applied the minimum rate,” and Cascais, which never applied it.
Amadora, Oeiras, and Sintra have been applying the minimum rate since 2021, and according to the municipality’s estimates, this year the revenue with a rate of 0.30% would be 35.4 million euros, with 0.34% it would total 40.1 million euros, with an increase of 4.7 million euros compared to the rate in force.
Applying 0.45%, Oeiras estimates “revenue above 53 million euros,” with a “fiscal gain” of 17.7 million euros, and dropping the fixed deduction of the family IMI would obtain 776 thousand euros.
The patrimonial structure of Oeiras, according to the proposal, consists of 87,440 owners, with about 26% of the taxable value, evaluated at 8.893 million euros, belonging “to companies, banks, insurers, funds, and public sector entities,” so “a significant number of financial entities and companies” also benefited from the current minimum IMI rate.
On the other hand, the municipality intends “to continue investing in key areas” such as “education and social support,” and wants “to requalify and equip schools and solidarity network establishments with better conditions,” in an “approximate investment of 19 million euros.”
In a statement, the PS of Oeiras considered the proposal “a wrong political choice that directly penalizes families, companies, and small owners, at a time when the pressure on the cost of living is already high.”
“Isaltino Morais and the municipal executive have just broken the trust contract the citizens had in him. In a municipality with Oeiras’ financial strength, the executive decides to increase property taxes instead of easing the fiscal burden on families,” said Bruno Magro, president of PS Oeiras, quoted in the note.
The president of the socialist commission emphasized that many municipalities in the AML have “stabilized or even reduced the IMI rate,” while Oeiras chooses “an inverse path” and not even investment in schools and solidarity networks justifies “a widespread and transversal increase in the tax burden.”
The Evoluir Oeiras coalition (Livre/BE/Volt), in a statement, expressed “deep concern and disagreement” with the increase of the IMI rate to the maximum value, “a measure not included in the Inov electoral program, nor ever announced before, which now appears as an unpleasant surprise for thousands of families.”
“It is unacceptable that the executive justifies this increase with social and educational needs, while continuing to spend millions on grandiose projects, like the Fórum Municipal building which is already at about 80 million euros — double the initially estimated cost,” pointed out the coalition, which was not elected to the city hall and has two municipal deputies.
A source from the municipality indicated that “the IMI proposal should not be analyzed in isolation, as a fiscal package with benefits for the population and so that families are not affected will also be presented in a council meeting.”
