Single property tax, IMU and TARI: Parliament provides a helping hand with amendments to prevent disputes

The momentum now behind the legislative decree on local taxes and federalism – which had been in limbo for over a year whilst awaiting an agreement in the Unified Conference that never materialised – has come full circle, as reflected in the opinions expressed by the Finance Committees of the Chamber of Deputies (rapporteur Saverio Congedo of FdI) and the Senate (rapporteur Massimo Garavaglia of the Lega). The framework remains that reaffirmed by the Council of Ministers on 28 July and which, in order not to place a burden on public finances, retains the framework of a static IRPEF sharing arrangement, in contrast to the requests from local authorities for a dynamic approach that allows for growth in line with increases in the IRPEF tax base.

The parliamentary committees’ attempt to maintain a channel of dialogue with local authorities is also evident from the proposal to set up a technical working group at the Ministry of the Economy – at no cost to the State budget – comprising two representatives from the Ministry itself, one representative from the Ministry of the Interior, one representative from the Department for Regional Affairs and Autonomies, and two representatives from ANCI, with the task of reviewing the allocation of resources to regional and local authorities (resulting from the application of Article 14 of Decree-Law 78 of 2010), also with a view to the preparation of the forthcoming draft budget bill.

For the rest, the proposals also aim at a sort of update and evolution, such as those designed to extend the rules governing corporate crises to regional and local authority taxes, or to remove provisions that have already been approved and are therefore in force as they have been incorporated into other legislative instruments. But there is also an attempt to defuse areas where there have been, or could be, ‘triggers’ ready to spark tax litigation. Take the case of the single property licence fee (Cup), where, amongst other requests for government intervention, there is a need to clarify, for the telecommunications sector, regarding who is liable for payment, differentiating the levy between those who occupy public land with cables and conduits without selling services to end customers, those who sell the service to end customers, and, finally, those who combine both sales and network provision. Or, for that matter, the request to exclude from the tax base: ‘balconies, verandas, bay windows and similar permanent fixtures’.

A request has also been made regarding the IMU. For the tax on properties with a contested assessed value, MPs are calling for an extension of the deadlines for determining the additional amount due following the outcome of the legal proceedings. As for the Tari (waste collection tax), the proposed amendment regarding non-domestic users aims to replace the term ‘rapportata’ with ‘proporzionata’, so as to clarify that the reduction in the variable part of the tariff is granted in proportion to the quantity of waste disposed of outside the public waste collection service.

The PD has expressed strong opposition. “We are facing an extremely serious institutional power grab that tramples on the autonomy of local authorities and threatens to paralyse essential services, starting with local public transport” stressed in a statement Senator Cristina Tajani, the PD’s group leader on the Finance Committee, and Senator Daniele Manca, the party’s group leader on the Budget Committee, both at the Senate. “The Government – they added – is scrapping the earmarking requirement for the Local Public Transport Fund, replacing it with a sham ‘IRPEF co-financing’ scheme, whereby ‘local authorities will be faced with a dramatic dilemma: cutting bus services and services to citizens, or increasing ticket prices’.