Anti-evasion, those who do not reply to letters under fire

Increasing selection of taxpayers most likely to evade tax based on risk analysis. Those with a negative score in terms of tax reliability are more likely to be audited. The operational plan drawn up by the Agency, headed by Vincenzo Carbone, who has just been reappointed by the Council of Ministers, aims at a targeted fight against tax evasion, thanks also to the support (it should be considered simply as such, given the centrality and human priority that the director has always stressed in the role of the tax officials) of the databases (there are almost 200 managed by the technological partner Sogei) available and the investment in analysis capacity.

On the one hand, the numbers speak of a forecast increase in inspections: 270,000 in 2026 with at least a 20% increase compared to 2025 to gradually reach at least 350,000 inspections in 2028. With an underlying trend that will in any case see a greater number of inspections against medium-sized companies: an increase of at least 20% in 2026 to reach +50% in 2028. On the other hand, the strategy and the path to get there, which envisage an all-round presidium. Because if the basic idea is to invest in compliance and spontaneous compliance, there must be no room for misunderstanding or free zones. So what will happen to those who remain inert or do nothing after being reported by the tax authorities? The Agency intends to maintain the highest degree of vigilance, proceeding with the assessment where the conditions exist, even for small amounts. It will look more broadly at the taxpayer to check whether the type of anomaly reported in the alert has also occurred in more than one tax period.

Still on the subject of anomalies, the spotlight is also on those relating to Isa subjects, i.e. VAT holders who fill out so-called tax reports. Here at least two orders of considerations must be made. Firstly, the audience is vast with over two million businesses, companies and professionals involved and heterogeneous in terms of type of activity (1,100 codes mapped), geographical distribution and legal form. In short, the IRS does not have the strength to move in random order. Hence, the score can be a starting light: the symptom of low tax reliability can direct the selection towards situations with greater criticality and on which the outcome of the control can reveal undeclared tax bases and unpaid taxes. Secondly, the close connection with the two-year arrangement with creditors (Cpb) should not be forgotten, especially with regard to those who, in the presence of anomalies, have been invited to regularise them and then adhere to the two-year agreement. After all, it was written in black and white in the regulations establishing the Cpb that the Revenue Agency and the Guardia di Finanza 'plan to deploy greater operational capacity to intensify control activities against those who do not adhere to the two-year Preventive Agreement or who lapse from it'. And now the spotlights can also be turned on them.