The Madrid High Court of Justice has upheld a tax fraud ruling against the Spanish online creator known as Rubius, confirming a 73,000 euro liability tied to 2013 tax filings.
The Disputed-Administrative Division of the Madrid High Court rejected an appeal brought by Snofokk, a company associated with the online personality Rubius, challenging the decision issued by the Madrid Regional Economic Administrative Court in January 2020. The appellate court affirmed the lower court’s decision that the company must pay 15,979 euros as a refund related to 2013 income, while also upholding a near 50,000 euro fine and an additional 23,000 euro amount that had not been paid.
In its analysis, the court reviewed how tax authorities calculated the assessed amount and considered the arguments presented by the company linked to Rubius and by the State Prosecutor. The judgment states that Rubius’s services to the relevant company were comparable to the services he provides to other clients. This finding supports a recalculation that challenges the original tax relief claimed by the creator, suggesting that the creator gained an unnecessary tax advantage by using corporate tax mechanisms rather than being taxed as an individual. The court emphasized that the plaintiff company did not provide any substantial added value that would generate revenue beyond what was already being produced.
The court detailed the financial activities of the company Snofokk, noting that it earned 230,344 euros in 2013 and paid a total of 98,760 euros for professional services to its main partner, with Rubius owning 98% of the equity. The company was funded by independent loans to third parties, and the direct and personal involvement of Rubén Doblas was acknowledged. However, Snofokk did not employ staff or collaborators and possessed only basic equipment such as computers, cameras, and headphones.
Further context shows Rubius publicly announced in 2021 a relocation to Andorra for his activities, a move that several other content creators had already pursued. The decision reflects ongoing considerations among digital creators regarding tax residency, income streams, and the balance between personal and corporate taxation in Europe.
Experts note that this case underscores the complexities of digital revenue models in which content creators monetize audience engagement through multiple channels. Tax authorities scrutinize how payments for services are structured, the true economic substance of arrangements, and whether corporate vehicles are used to shift tax liabilities. For creators operating across borders, the ruling highlights the importance of transparent accounting practices, accurate classification of income, and adherence to applicable tax laws in the jurisdictions where operations occur.
Observers also point to the broader legal implications for platforms, sponsorship arrangements, and brand partnerships that support creator income. While the specifics of this case revolve around a particular enterprise and tax period, the underlying themes resonate with many creators who manage teams, equipment, and contractual relationships across several markets. Regulators have signaled continued attention to how savings connected to corporate structures are applied and whether those savings align with substantive business value rather than merely altering tax outcomes.
As tax administrations continue to refine their approaches to digital economies, creators with international reach may want to seek professional guidance to ensure that their structures and filings reflect genuine economic activity. The Madrid ruling serves as a reminder that national tax rules apply to income generated through online activities, even when the activities occur primarily within the digital space and involve cross-border aspects.