Spain’s recent housing measures have highlighted the risk that governments can change the rules governing property ownership, according to Kristyna Mazankova, director of the Masters in Bitcoin at the Universidad de las Hespérides. The issue has renewed debate over whether Bitcoin can serve as another long-term wealth-building asset for households.

For generations, Spanish families have relied on land and property to build wealth over decades. Mazankova argues that two emergency housing decrees approved by the government on 29 September have made that strategy more uncertain. The measures were presented as a response to housing pressures but have also raised questions about contractual stability and property supply.

Two housing decrees

The Spanish government approved two emergency decrees, or reales decretos-ley, on 29 September. Under Spain’s Constitution, this mechanism is reserved for cases of “extraordinary and urgent need.” A decree-law takes effect immediately, after which Congress has 30 days to validate or repeal it. The government divided the housing reforms into two decrees so they could be voted on separately.

The first decree capped rent increases through the end of 2027. If an existing rent was already above the maximum established by the official reference-price index, it could not increase. In other cases, the parties could agree to an update, but without a new agreement the increase could not exceed 2%.

Spain’s inflation rate in September was 4.9%, according to the national statistics institute. As a result, the measure could reduce landlords’ real income over time if rents were limited to the stated cap.

The second decree introduced compulsory lease renewals after the minimum term if neither party had given notice. Renewals would occur in successive five-year periods, or seven-year periods when the landlord was a legal entity. A landlord ending a contract without a reason listed in the law would have to compensate the tenant.

Where possible, the compensation would be calculated using the state rent-reference system. It could not be lower than one month’s rent for every year the tenant had lived in the home. In practice, the measure would reduce owners’ ability to recover their property or re-let it at current market prices.

The measures also applied to contracts that had already been signed, beginning on their next renewal date, according to a Provivienda summary. Critics argued that the decrees could be unconstitutional because they retroactively altered private agreements entered into under different rules. They cited Article 9.3 of the Spanish Constitution, which bars the retroactive application of provisions that restrict individual rights.

Congress did not resolve that constitutional question. On 2 October, it rejected the first decree by 178 votes to 172 and the second by 184 votes to 166. Prime Minister Sánchez then called general elections for 29 November.

The Council of Ministers later approved both decrees again, making only technical changes, and submitted them to the Diputación Permanente of Congress. The body replaces the full chamber after Congress has been dissolved. Junts’s vote was not required there. Sánchez said the decree covering automatic renewals would take effect only if the Diputación Permanente validated it, rather than immediately upon publication in the BOE. Jurists consulted by a newspaper described the move as potentially a borderline abuse of law. Whether the automatic-renewal rules take effect therefore depends on the Diputación Permanente’s validation, while the general election on 29 November will determine the composition of the Congress that follows.

The measures have focused attention on the difference between operating under strict rules and facing rules that change after an investment has been made.

Listings withdrawn from the market

Property owners began removing listings before the congressional vote. A Spanish television program reported that approximately 2,900 rental listings were withdrawn from property portals in about four hours, according to EDATV.

In Madrid, listings reportedly fell by about 20% in less than 24 hours, from 11,815 to 9,398, according to LaBandera. The figures were early and unaudited, but they indicated an immediate reaction among some property owners.

Similar effects have been documented in other jurisdictions. In Berlin, a 2020 rent freeze lasted five years. Studies at the time found that the supply of regulated flats roughly halved while unregulated rents increased. Germany’s constitutional court struck down the law in 2021.

In San Francisco, a 1994 study by Stanford researchers Diamond, McQuade and Qian found that expanded rent control helped existing tenants remain in their homes. It also found that landlords reduced regulated housing supply by about 15%, while rents across the city rose by approximately 5%.

In Catalonia, rent caps introduced in stressed zones in 2024 slowed price growth, but rental listings declined 22.2% in Barcelona while increasing 3.9% in Madrid, according to data from Fedea reported by idealista.

Spain previously operated under forced, near-permanent lease extensions from 1946 to 1985. The system kept old rents frozen for decades, while owners reduced building maintenance and city centres deteriorated. The 1985 Boyer decree ended that arrangement. The new automatic-renewal measure has been described as resembling that earlier model in its effect on landlords’ control over their properties.

A housing supply shortage

The central problem identified by the article is Spain’s shortage of housing. In 2025, approximately 240,000 new households were formed while only about 92,000 homes were completed. The Bank of Spain estimated the accumulated deficit between household formation and housing construction from 2021 through 2025 at roughly 750,000 homes, to Cantabria Económica.

The report identified scarce buildable land, slow urban development and rigid planning rules as obstacles. Economist Daniel Fernández Méndez and other economists have argued that restrictive land policies and increasingly strict building standards have made construction unprofitable even at current prices, according to Hespérides.

The article argues that restricting new construction while limiting returns from existing housing can reduce supply from both directions. Owners may sell, delay a decision or leave a property empty rather than risk a tenant who remains in place under rules they cannot control. If fewer homes are offered for rent, the remaining properties may become more expensive, while more tenants could be pushed into informal arrangements without contracts or legal protection.

Buying a home does not necessarily provide an alternative. The same shortage that raises rents also makes homes less affordable to purchase. Some landlords may be pushed to sell, but sales generally adjust more slowly than rental listings. An owner with a mortgage larger than the property’s market value may be unable to sell, while others may wait for a change in government and keep their apartments vacant.

Bitcoin and rule stability

The article contrasts property with Bitcoin on the grounds that a building remains permanently subject to the laws of the jurisdiction where it is located. Bitcoin’s protocol, by comparison, has a capped supply of 21 million and that rule has not changed in 17 years. No government minister can directly cap its yield, freeze the asset’s protocol or extend another person’s claim over coins held in a private wallet.

Bitcoin is also portable across borders and can be acquired in small amounts. Property generally requires a deposit, mortgage, notary and long-term financial commitment, while Bitcoin can be purchased incrementally. These characteristics are presented as reasons some households may consider Bitcoin alongside, rather than instead of, housing.

The article also notes that Bitcoin carries substantial price volatility. A stake purchased shortly after the 2017 peak lost almost three-quarters of its value within a year before later outperforming Spanish housing several times over. Past performance does not predict future returns, and Bitcoin’s value can fall sharply. The housing comparison measured price changes only and excluded rental income, taxes, maintenance and purchase costs.

The article states that families will continue to need homes and will keep buying or renting them. The question concerns property held as an investment, particularly by small investors seeking to build wealth over a lifetime. It argues that Bitcoin may be considered as a long-term holding, while emphasizing that its price can decline sharply in the short term and that it is not a substitute for money needed in the near future.

The measures approved in Spain have therefore placed two different risks in focus: property is exposed to changing rules within a fixed jurisdiction, while Bitcoin is exposed to significant market-price fluctuations. Whatever Congress ultimately decides, the dispute has shown Spanish property owners that the terms governing their contracts may change after those contracts are signed.

The original article, “The Real Estate Market Is Dead in Spain. Long Live Bitcoin,” first appeared in Bitcoin Magazine and was written by Kristyna Mazankova.