Where the recommendation comes from

The Ministry’s guidance for international teleworker applications closes with a set of general warnings.  One of them says it is advisable to attach a letter explaining the documentation presented, especially when it does not conform exactly to what has been requested.  The same guidance warns that additional documents may be requested at any time if those presented are not considered sufficient.  Put those two sentences together and the purpose of the letter is clear.  It exists to make the file sufficient on first reading, so the officer does not have to stop the clock and write to you.

A request for further documents, a requerimiento, is not a refusal, but it costs weeks and it usually asks for exactly the thing the letter should have explained.  The guide on how the UGE reads a file describes what the officer is checking.  The letter is written for that reader.

When it is not optional

In a file where every document is the one on the list, the letter is a courtesy, a one-page index that saves the officer time.  In these files it is the structure that holds the case up.

  • The employer does not issue employment contracts. Many U.S. companies hire on an offer letter and an employee handbook.  The Ministry asks for the contract.  The file carries the offer letter, the payslips, the W‑2 and the employer letter, and the explanatory letter says why those together prove the three-month relationship the contract would have proved.  The guide on employers who refuse letters covers the harder version of this.
  • Income comes from more than one source. Two clients, or a salary plus a contract, or a salary plus an LLC. Each source is proved separately, and the letter adds them up, shows the total against the threshold and explains which relationship is the one the permit is based on.  The multiple income guide goes into the proof.
  • Experience replaces a degree. The law allows three years of professional experience instead of a qualification.  The letter organises the reference letters, contracts and records into a timeline that adds up to three years in the relevant field.  The no-degree guide explains what counts.
  • Names differ across documents. A marriage, a court order, a middle name used in one country and not the other.  The letter states the discrepancy, points to the document that explains it, and closes the question before the officer opens it.
  • The company has a Spanish entity. The letter names it first, describes the group structure and shows that the applicant is employed by, reports to and works for the foreign entity only.  The Spanish office guide sets out why that matters.
  • The criminal record certificates do not match the passport. A U.S. citizen who lived in Germany for the last two years files a German certificate and no FBI check. The letter explains that certificates follow residence, not citizenship, so the officer does not read the missing FBI check as an omission.
  • The role sits near the remote line. An operations title, a sales function, an owner-operator.  The letter describes the functions, says who handles anything physical, and addresses the structure question the UGE is entitled to ask.  The remote job guide explains that test.

How it is structured

The letter I file follows the same shape every time, because the officer benefits from predictability as much as the applicant does.

  1. Who is applying and for what. Two lines.  The applicant, the permit requested, the representative filing it, and the family members whose applications accompany it.
  2. The relationship. One paragraph naming the foreign company, the applicant’s position, when the relationship began and the documents that prove it, in the order they appear in the file.
  3. The documents against the list. A short numbered section that follows the Ministry’s list item by item and says which document in the file answers each.  Where the document is the one requested, one line.  Where it is a substitute, a paragraph explaining what it is and why it proves the same thing.
  4. The points that need explaining. The gaps, the discrepancies, the unusual facts.  Each one stated plainly, each one followed by the document that resolves it.
  5. The close. A sentence confirming the applicant is in Spain in a regular situation, the fee has been paid, and the representative is available for any clarification.  No more.

Written that way it runs to one or two pages in Spanish.  It is filed as the first document after the form, so it is the first thing the officer reads.

Two paragraphs, as examples

These are illustrative, not taken from any file, and they show the register.  Flat, specific, tied to documents.

The applicant’s employer does not issue employment contracts to its staff, as is common practice among technology companies in the United States.  The employment relationship, which began on 3 February 2025, is evidenced by the signed offer letter (document 4), the payslips for the twelve months preceding this application (document 5), the employer’s declaration of 15 August 2026 (document 6), which states the position, the functions, the salary in euros and the express authorisation to perform the work from Spain by telematic means, and the 2025 Form W‑2 (document 7).

The applicant has resided in Berlin, Germany, from June 2024 to the present.  In accordance with the requirement that criminal record certificates be provided for the countries of residence during the two years preceding the application, the file contains the certificate issued by the German Federal Office of Justice on 2 September 2026, apostilled and translated by a sworn translator (document 9).  No certificate from the United States is included because the applicant has not resided there during that period.  The sworn declaration covering the five preceding years is at document 10.

What to keep out

  • Pleading. Love of Spain, career dreams, the beauty of Valencia.  The officer is checking requirements, and every sentence that does not serve one weakens the letter.
  • Promises. “The applicant will register with Social Security promptly.” The permit requires it; saying it adds nothing and reads as if it might not happen.
  • Anything a document contradicts. If the letter says the salary is €5,000 a month and the payslips say €4,800, the letter has created a problem the file did not have.  Every figure in the letter is taken from a document in the file.
  • Legal argument. The letter explains documents.  It does not lecture the UGE on the law it applies daily.
  • Length. A four-page letter signals a weak file.  Say what needs saying and stop.

The bottom line

The explanatory letter is the one document you write for the officer rather than collect from someone else.  In a clean file it is an index.  In a file with a substitute, a gap or an unusual fact, it is the difference between a decision on first reading and a request for more paper.  Map the documents to the list, explain what needs explaining with a document beside it, and stop.  If you want to know which of the situations above applies to your file, the free assessment is where I find out.

Sources: Ministry of Inclusion, Social Security and Migration, document list for initial applications by international teleworkers and “Preguntas frecuentes.  Autorizaciones de residencia y trabajo de teletrabajadores internacionales” · Law 14/2013 as amended by Ley 28/2022.  Example paragraphs are illustrative and describe no real applicant.  Last updated: 3 October 2026.