Planifica Madrid, a public company dependent on the Comunidad de Madrid, can acquire property only for administrative use, while the €6.3 million penthouse is a residential dwelling on the top floor of a building at Calle General Martínez Campos 35 in Madrid. That mismatch is one reason the Tribunal de Cuentas is examining the regional administration’s purchase. Planifica completed the acquisition on 14 April 2026.
The case moved past an initial hurdle after seven complaints were submitted. On 13 November 2026, the Tribunal de Cuentas rejected requests from the Comunidad de Madrid and Planifica Madrid to close the proceedings and referred the proposed appointment of an investigating delegate to its Sección de Enjuiciamiento. The tribunal’s preliminary assessment found indications warranting an examination of whether the €6.3 million expenditure caused accounting damage. Its resolution described a possible outflow of public funds “carente por completo de justificación legal” — entirely without legal justification — as grounds for an investigation, not as a final finding that the purchase was unlawful or that officials are liable.
The concerns centre on the property’s suitability and price. The Tribunal notes that Planifica’s remit is restricted to property for “uso administrativo”, while a report from the regional Presidency department cited reasons for the purchase that prioritized residential use. Later explanations said the penthouse was intended for institutional purposes, including work and rest, with authorities occasionally staying there. A Gesvalt valuation dated 13 February 2026 assessed the penthouse at €6,242,884.19, compared with the €6.3 million purchase price. The difference was €57,115.81, or about 0.91% of the amount paid. The assessment also raises the possibility of an overpayment; the material supplied says no prospective buyer had emerged at that stage.
Opposition parties on the left have linked the purchase to an alleged interest by Isabel Díaz Ayuso, president of the Comunidad de Madrid, in using the penthouse as an official residence. That remains their allegation. RUSSPAIN has also covered political criticism in Spain, including Muñoz’s strike criticism.
The Comunidad de Madrid argues that the transaction has caused no “pérdida patrimonial”. It says any possibility of selling the property for less remains hypothetical and contingent on future events. The inquiry remains unresolved; the tribunal’s decision does not cancel the sale or order repayment of the purchase price.
