Sustainable Tourism Law

356 SUSTAINABLE TOURISM LAW benefits geared to encourage certain beneficial behaviours, or on the other hand, through environmental taxes 47 . These taxes try to tax, or over tax – given that the taxable matter very likely already applies to other general taxes – determined taxable facts, in order to reduce or mitigate consumption and behaviour, or simply make those who benefit most from certain goods and services -and therefore cause their wear and tear- contribute in a greater degree to public expenditures. Generally, this type of taxes is affected, perceiving its effect on the particular use of the collected amount for funds and specific items of public expenditure. The doctrine has constantly disputed these taxes. It has acted that way so extrafiscal taxes, environmental or not, cannot contravene principles of tax justice, including the principle of economic capacity and equality and non-discrimination. That principle, which means that tributes cannot be demanded where there is no manifestation of wealth, and should not be nullified by extra-fiscal objectives. This is what many of the authors think 48 . But the biggest problem is the over-imposition that these taxes cause. The taxable matter is already taxed by general state-owned taxes that subject income, wealth and consumption or expenses to taxation, therefore, to some degree, taxes with predominantly extra-fiscal purposes cause over-imposition, at least from an economic point of view, regarding other tax figures. Also considering the principle of equality, environmental taxes can present problems, as noted by SABÁN GODOY in the Seminar on Taxation of Tourism, organized by the World Tourism Organization in Madrid, in 1997, “environmental taxation is usually referred to products with the consequent discriminatory effects...” 49 . From a legal point of view, the legitimacy of environmental tax figures, which in most cases are drafted by the Autonomous Communities, depends on their taxable facts, that is, the factual budgets that generate the obligation of taxation 47 The Spanish State has traditionally preferred the tax benefit instrument, compared to the Autonomous Communities most prone to the establishment of environmental taxes, as is evident in MAGADÁN DÍAZ, M.-RIVAS GARCÍA, J.: Medio Ambiente y Fiscalidad Autonómica, Septem Ediciones, Oviedo, 2004, p. 14. However, as they point out, the environmental objectives in state taxation have been scarce, where we add from our survey that, although the CC.AA. have worked harder, these goals are not always seen clearly in the design of taxes for environmental issues. The extra-fiscal objectives must be observed throughout the liquidation structure of taxes, and not only in the preambles of the laws that regulate them. It is also not enough to affect the amounts collected into a fund by such tributary figures in order to use them in the improvement of the environment or the patrimony and ecological environment. A positive element is needed, and such is the principle that “the polluter pays” be warned at the time of liquidating the tax. 48 Vid. LAGO MONTERO, J. M.: El Poder Tributario de las Comunidades Autónomas, Aranzadi, ElCano (Navarra), 2000; and SABÁN GODOY, A .: Las nuevas tasas medioambientales …, op. cit. 49 SABÁN GODOY, A.: Las nuevas tasas medioambientales..., op. cit.