The relationship between the Spaniards and the Spaniards shows signs of gradual erosion, but far from the risk of breaking up. The few data offered by official organizations point to a slight deterioration in the perception of the tax system, although still a long way from the years with the most apathy, back at the worst of the financial crisis. Where a somewhat more marked rise in disaffection is observed is among young people, the segment of the population that, by far, acknowledges showing more resentment towards the tax system. It is a feeling that grows in the heat of the times and an increasingly uncertain future.
According to figures managed by the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IEF), dependent on the Ministry of Finance, 93.6% of those over 65 years of age consider that taxes are necessary, a percentage that falls to 75.4% among taxpayers between 25 and 39 years old and 67.9% among young people between 18 and 24 years old. 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 x-ray. Its latest survey, from July 2025, reflects that 30% of Spaniards are close to the following statement: taxes are something that the State forces us to pay without knowing very well in exchange for what. It is the highest percentage in more than 10 years, although it is still far from the peak reached in 2014, of 38%. In recent years, the number of respondents who feel that they pay less than what they pay in taxes has also grown. In both cases, the younger layers, especially men, 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 the CIS, added to the reflections of several experts, point to a battery of explanations that range from a growing sense of to an increase in uncertainty about the future. Added to these are a disconnection between what is paid and what is received and, as is already common in countless phenomena, the effects of misinformation.
“There is a fairly widespread idea that the system is not sufficiently progressive and that the effort is not distributed equitably,” explains Sara Torregrosa, Ramón y Cajal researcher at the Public University of Navarra. The latest fiscal barometer from the IEF confirms this: 83% of citizens believe that the tax pressure falls more on low and medium incomes than on high incomes and large companies. Furthermore, 55% consider that the relationship between taxes paid and services received is worse in Spain than in other countries in the European Union. For years, the CIS has also reported 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 generation 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, he maintains, is closely linked to that feeling, and when it is not considered fair or unfair, support suffers.
In the case of young people, this perception is combined with structural factors. Torregrosa emphasizes that the welfare state has a clear generational dimension, with a significant weight of items such as , much more focused on the elderly. Although the system works under a life cycle logic – that is, you contribute more in some stages and receive more in others – it 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 financial difficulties. “They have lived,” recalls Cadaval, which conditions their way of relating to institutions. The idea of contributing today in exchange for protection in the future is weakened when that future is perceived as uncertain. That is to say, the lack of expectations and less confidence in the role of the State also end up transferring to the fiscal sphere.
Torregrosa emphasizes the same line by pointing out that confidence in the system depends largely on long-term expectations. “If you perceive that they are not going to guarantee you certain levels of protection or well-being, the redistributive logic loses credibility,” he 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 pedagogy, which affects the entire population. Violeta Ruiz Almendral, professor of Financial and Tax Law at the Carlos III University of Madrid, warns that the debate on 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 vision, in which what is defined as “half-truths” proliferate. The experts also focus on what comes from certain public profiles that usually reside in Andorra, whose channels are primarily consumed by young audiences.
In this context, it is difficult to build a solid perception. The complexity of the tax system, together with the fragmentation of public debate, favors biased interpretations that fuel unrest. 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 Alternativas Foundation, places emphasis precisely on this lack of depth in the treatment of the tax debate. Remember that, in general, a majority of citizens, although it may be decreasing, continue to consider 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 placed on partial or interested visions, which prevents conveying a complete image of the system and its functioning.
This leads some to put on the table opinions such as that the public treasury steals from the taxpayer or false statements such as that the tax pressure in Spain is higher than in the European Union. “Radical statements are made without thinking and without relating. It is true that these are minority positions, but their growth and dissemination should be of concern,” says Ruiz-Huerta.
Strengthening that connection appears to be one of the keys to reducing disaffection. In this sense, José María Durán, director and researcher at the Barcelona Institute of Economics and professor at the University of Barcelona, raises 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 universities cost. Making that information explicit, for example, when someone goes to a hospital or gets a scholarship, would help highlight the role of taxes in everyday life.
Cadaval also believes this. “Every year I teach young people at the university 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 income and expenses. “For example, if a tax reduction is proposed, it would be essential to justify it, expressing the corresponding reductions on the expenditure side,” he adds. The numbers would allow us to put together the story of taxes as a support for the public. Every year, Fedea publishes a report that shows that, broadly speaking, the 60% of the population with the lowest income are net beneficiaries of public intervention, while the households of the other 40%, the richest, are net contributors.
