Wine tourism in Portugal: the law that has not arrived and the European money already waiting

The European framework that changed everything in February 2026

Regulation (EU) 2026/471 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 24 February 2026, is the most important document the European wine sector has received in decades. It amends Regulations (EU) No 1308/2013, No 251/2014 and 2021/2115, which form the core of the Common Market Organisation for wine, and does something without direct precedent: it expressly recognises that wine tourism is a strategic commercial activity for wine operators and makes eligible, under national strategic plans of the CAP strategic plans, support for structuring the offer, marketing and promotion of wine tourism.

European co-financing for wine tourism promotion and direct sales in producing regions can reach 60% of eligible expenditure, with national complementation of up to 30% for small and medium-sized enterprises. Promotion campaigns are fundable for three years, renewable for two further three-year periods, potentially yielding nine consecutive years of support. Producer organisations holding protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications may also access specific funds for wine tourism actions.

In plain terms: there is approved European money, awaiting mobilisation, for Portuguese wine tourism. The Douro, Alentejo, Vinho Verde, Dão, Bairrada and countless other regions may apply for concrete support to build reception infrastructure, develop marketing tools, create experiences, train teams and consolidate the link between the PDO and the visitor. What is missing, as this analysis will show, is the national legal framework that would make this process safe, professional and lasting.

What a wine tourism contract is, in law

The first difficulty is that Portuguese law does not know what wine tourism is. The concept does not exist in any legislation currently in force. When a wine operator invites visitors to take part in a harvest, taste wines or stay overnight at a quinta, no named contract is concluded. What is concluded is something legal scholars classify as an atypical contract, grounded in freedom of contract, which doctrine has progressively characterised as a mixed contract: a combination of service provision, sale, space licence and, at times, package travel contract.

This hybrid nature is not merely an academic curiosity. When the visitor package is sold directly by the wine estate, the applicable regime is that of general obligations. When intermediated by a travel agency, Decree-Law No 17/2018 of 8 March, transposing Directive 2015/2302 on package travel, enters the picture, imposing strict and joint liability on the organiser for harm suffered by the traveller, including harm caused by third parties such as the winery itself. The same experience, depending on who sells it, generates radically different liability regimes.

Civil liability: where general law falls short

Everyone knows accidents happen. What not everyone knows is that without specific regulation, determining who pays and how much is, in large measure, a procedural lottery.

Contractual liability, governed by Articles 798 et seq. of the Civil Code, responds where there is non-performance or defective performance of an assumed obligation. More complex problems arise when the harm is physical rather than contractual, and no contract addressed it.

Tortious liability, founded on Article 483 of the Civil Code, requires proof of an unlawful act, fault, damage and causation. The Courts of Appeal have not yet ruled specifically on wine tourism, but the Guimarães Court of Appeal, in 2021, held a hotel establishment liable for a fall on a wet polished marble corridor, finding that the failure to post warning signs and take preventive measures was an adequate cause of the damage. The transposition to wine tourism is direct: anyone who opens their premises to the public assumes duties of care that courts will flesh out by analogy.

More sensitive still is the potential application of Article 493(2) of the Civil Code, which establishes a presumption of fault for inherently dangerous activities. Whether a participatory harvest, a tasting in a low-ceilinged cellar or a tractor excursion across steep terrain falls within this category remains unanswered. Without a specific rule, the answer will depend on the case, the facts and the judge.

What contracts must contain while the law is absent

The absence of specific regulation places on the contract a burden it is often ill-equipped to bear. In a sector that still confuses hospitality with informality, written contracts are frequently absent or inadequate.

A technically sound wine tourism contract begins with pre-contractual information: a precise description of what the experience includes and excludes, associated risks, relevant contraindications, a cancellation policy with timescales and reimbursement conditions aligned with the Civil Code's rules on resolution for non-performance. Liability limitation clauses are valid, subject to limits: Article 809 of the Civil Code prohibits the exclusion or limitation of liability for wilful misconduct or gross negligence.

The GDPR demands growing attention. Wine tourism involves intense public contact: online bookings, loyalty programmes, image capture during guided visits, newsletters. Each personal data flow requires a clear legal basis, an intelligible privacy policy and, in certain cases, a data protection impact assessment.

Rural leases as a route to wine tourism

The rigidity of the land market suitable for viticulture has made rural leases an increasingly relevant instrument for structuring wine tourism operations. The New Legal Regime for Rural Leases, in force since 2010, is compatible with the practice of wine tourism as a complementary activity to viticulture, but the specific contractual arrangements between landlord and tenant remain a zone of uncertainty the legislature should address. Clauses on adequate duration, adaptation works for wine tourism, revenue sharing and space allocation for visits find no clear legislative guidance.

This matters directly in the context of Regulation 2026/471: a producer farming leased land who intends to apply for CAPS co-financing for wine tourism infrastructure needs long-term contractual stability with the landlord. Without a clear legal rule, that stability depends solely on the goodwill of the parties — which is not a sufficient foundation for investment.

What other countries have already understood

Portugal did not arrive late to wine tourism. It arrived early to tourism and late to its regulation. Our main European competitors understood long ago that the absence of rules is not neutrality — it is a competitive disadvantage dressed as freedom.

Italy was the pioneer: Law No 205 of 27 December 2017 recognised wine tourism as a connected agricultural activity, and the Ministerial Decree of 12 March 2019 completed the regime, defining its component activities, establishing minimum quality and safety requirements and regulating the qualifications required of those in charge. The result was the professionalisation of a sector that was already strong and became also legally sound. France followed in October 2025 with Proposed Law No 1917 for strategic recognition of wine tourism, after the Interministerial Tourism Council declared it a national priority. In Spain, the DOC Rioja integrates wine tourism into its regulatory council's rules, with certification requirements and minimum experience standards. Portugal is the only major wine country in Western Europe that has not yet responded to this challenge.

Why the experience is worth more than the bottle

The margin on a bottle of wine is under permanent pressure: distribution, logistics, price competition, exchange rates, tariffs, business cycles in export markets. The margin on a well-structured wine tourism experience faces none of those pressures to the same degree.

Thirty visitors over a weekend, with a guided tasting, pairing dinner, vineyard walk and overnight stay, can generate turnover equivalent to hundreds of cases of wine — without international shipping, without distributor commissions, without out-of-stock supermarket shelves. With the additional advantage no marketing campaign can replicate at equivalent cost: the visitor who lived the experience at the quinta buys that wine with different eyes. They take bottles home, but they also take the story, the scent, the memory of who made it.

Well-managed wine tourism does not compete with wine sales — it amplifies them. It is the best branding instrument a producer can have, because the visitor does not consume advertising, they consume authenticity. This is precisely why Regulation 2026/471 treated wine tourism as strategic investment: Brussels understood what the national legislature has yet to formalise.

What a Wine Tourism Statute should contain

What wine tourism needs is not more paperwork but rules that solve the real problems identified here and enable Portuguese operators to access safely the European funds that already exist. A practically useful Wine Tourism Statute must:

• Define the concept in law, identifying the activities it comprises and recognising it as a complementary activity to viticulture — the necessary foundation for tax treatment, for alignment with PDOs and PGIs, and for determining the civil liability regime.
• Create a national operator register, under the supervision of Turismo de Portugal and the Instituto da Vinha e do Vinho — the administrative instrument indispensable for any European co-financing system.
• Specify the civil liability regime: enhanced pre-contractual information obligations, informed consent for risk activities, minimum mandatory insurance requirements.
• Articulate with rural leases, clarifying the tenant's powers to practise wine tourism, the landlord's authorisation requirements, the regime for adaptation works and contractual stability sufficient to justify long-term investment and CAP co-financing applications.
• Integrate the digital dimension: booking portals, loyalty programmes, QR code use, digital tools, GDPR obligations applicable to visitor contact.

Conclusion: European money does not wait forever

Portugal has extraordinary wine. It has demarcated regions with incomparable identity. It has passionate operators and visitors from around the world ready to pay for authentic experiences. What has been missing, for too long, is the capacity to transform this wealth into a legally sound and economically sustainable industry.

Regulation (EU) 2026/471 has irreversibly changed the terms of this conversation. The question is no longer whether Portugal should regulate wine tourism. It is whether Portugal will be in a position to absorb the European funds approved for that purpose, or whether it will cede that opportunity to the Italians and the French, who already have or are building the legal framework that makes it possible.

For operators, the message is clear: do not wait for the law to begin. Those who build the correct contractual structure now, who develop wine tourism offerings with legal rigour and strategic vision, will be the operators positioned to capture European co-financing, to scale safely and to build a brand that a bottle alone can never build. The experience is worth more than the bottle. European law recognised that in February 2026. Portugal has yet to do the same.