[franciscop]

> Y se añade "en ningún caso un generador se podrá conectar a la red interior de varios consumidores". Esta medida habría beneficiado a las comunidades de vecinos.

And it adds "under no circumstance a generator will be connected to the inner network of several consumers." This rule would have helped neighborhood communities.

[wolfhumble]

Seems like you are quoting an article from El Páis and not directly the law itself.

http://economia.elpais.com/economia/2015/10/09/actualidad/14...

[narag]

https://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2015/10/10/pdfs/BOE-A-2015-10927...

5.2.B - En el caso de que existan varias instalaciones de producción, el titular de todas y cada una de ellas deberá ser la misma persona física o jurídica.

(In case there are several production facilities, the owner of all of them must be the same natural or legal person)

[wolfhumble]

"Y se añade "en ningún caso un generador se podrá conectar a la red interior de varios consumidores". Esta medida habría beneficiado a las comunidades de vecinos."

Baterías y trabas burocráticas (right column):

http://economia.elpais.com/economia/2015/10/09/actualidad/14...

[narag]

I'm not arguing it's not quoted from the article, just providing a source to the original in case someone is interested.

[wolfhumble]

I thought that was the purpose, but I think it is always important to quote the source of one's comment. :-)

The quoted part within the article, seems actually to be from, Artículo 4.3 (yes, very pedantic :-)

Thanks for the link!

[ryanlol]

Should this be interpreted that the tenants could just form a company that owns (or even rents?) the equipment and then have the company pay them rent for the locations?

[narag]

Sorry, the Decreto Ley, like any other legal text is complex and needs careful interpretation. As a native speaker I can quickly locate (what I think is) the relevant section, but a detailed analysis would take a lot of time.

Anyway, I've followed these news for a while and heard the defense that the promoters of these measures did, so in case they were thinking in other interpretation they would have said so. It has been massively unpopular for the people that understand this issue at all, that are not many, and only was defended by the gov. party and the companies.

The industry minister, by the way, had to resign after he couldn't explain why his name was found in the Panama Papers as owner of offshore companies. And no, it wasn't a big deal, if you think the whole government has been under suspicion since the party treasurer was jailed four years ago for outright corruption and the prime minister Rajoy sent him a SMS telling him "to be strong". There are an acounting papers by the treasurer that show in detail how everyone in the party received monthly cash filled envelopes with money that came from building companies briberies.

Also the Valencia mayor is being investigated in another case that has every of her councillors formally accused already. You would think that the party would have her resigned. Instead they put her in a Senate commite to protect her.

This is the governing party, the one that, after all those smoking guns showed, still had the most votes last December and (after nobody could form a government) is expected to also win next month elections. So if you were thinking this Sun Tax, as it's commonly known, couldn't be so obviously corrupt, think again.

I'm not specially partisan, more of a "swinger voter", but the situation here has been disgusting for too much time. The worst of all is that many people's reaction has caused the rise of a party that is very close to Chávez and Maduro, actually there's strong suspicion that it was ilegally financed by Venezuela gov. party (Edit: and Iran!), so we could fall from the pan to the fire.

[franciscop]

I totally missed linking the article, thanks for linking it. I quoted a part that quotes the law, but the actual law is normally too cryptic. I'll link newspaper and law in the future as I agree it's important for some people.