across the forced withdrawal There is a possibility of withdrawing money directly from the state taxpayer current account against their wishes. One of the most famous cases in which the Italian Republic resorted to forced withdrawal was in 1992, when technocratic government led by Giuliano Amato imposed an extraordinary tax on the amount of bank and postal deposits held in banks and medium-term credit institutions.
In mid-July, the forced withdrawal became timely again, because Matthew Renzi denounced that in tax reform, which was recently approved by the Meloni government, it would allowrevenue agency Gaining access to current accounts of taxpayers to withdraw tax money or penalty. what actually happened? And above all, what exactly does the tax delegation, approved in the Chamber on Friday 4 July 2023, offer?
Mandatory return: what was predicted
Who was Matteo Renzi talking about? But above all what it really provides Tax delegation in respect of forced levies, Fortunately, Matteo Renzi’s doubts have been put to rest.
The law that the former Prime Minister had mentioned was included in thisArticle 16 of the delegated legislation and foresaw Possibility to increase collection agent’s mandated collection activity, This activity can also be increased through rationalization And thisAutomation of the attachment process for financial reports, These tasks can also be accomplished through application collaboration mechanisms starting at the third-party out-of-court declaration stage.
The public debate on the compulsory levy was triggered by what was included in Article 16 of the Fiscal Delegation, which provided for rationalization and automation of the process of closing current accounts. However, on closer inspection, within the Civil Code, it has existed for some years A rule that allows public and private creditors to interface with the Current Account RegistryTo verify what is the income of the debtor.
Notwithstanding the provisions of tax delegation, subjects who are entitled to attachment of current account They can’t find the balance of the tax report, The creditor may not know about this data until it receives communication from the bank whether the attachment was successful or not, In other words, any creditor including the revenue agency is unlikely to have access to the information related to the current account and its balance.
It was intended to provide official clarification on the direct coercive levy. Maurice LeoDeputy Minister of Economy, who assured that no extortionate charges would be imposed on taxpayers’ current accounts.
what the executive was working on wasn’t so much a levy, but there wasexpedite action Which appears to be directly provided for by the provisions of the Civil Code. Maurizio Leo pointed out that “when a taxpayer is an evader when the tax has not been paid and the judge has detected it, or when the taxpayer has not appealed, in this case the revenue/collection agency through computerized procedures Bank requests third party garnishment. Which already exists. Now this process is being expedited as through IT processes it will be known immediately whether the taxpayer has money or not.
But what was the government working on in essence? The purpose of the changes on which the executive was working was to inform the revenue agency current account balance in advance To avoid the initiation of attachment proceedings which are subsequently found to be unsuccessful, retaining all the protections provided by law in favor of the debtor, to the extent that it may be so.
What does the enabling legislation provide for today?
The controversy over extortion, which enlivened public debate during the month of July, now, looks old, Among the innovations that were discussed in the Senate on 28 July 2023 and ratified after the approval of the Tax Delegation, are new rules related to new procedures to strengthen collection activity. rewriting the norm It completely eliminated the risk of forced withdrawal from the current account of the taxpayers,
The Finance Commission of the Senate intervened directly on Article 16 of the enabling law. We recall that the version that was first approved by the Chamber also provided for
Also rationalization and automation of the attachment process of financial ties, through the introduction of an application support mechanism starting from the third party out-of-court declaration stage, as per Article 75-BIS of the Presidential Order. Republic of 29 September 1973, n. 602.
The new version that has been introduced provides, in a nutshell Little chance of computerization and simplification of processesThe security provided for debtors is also going to be missed.
In point 3 of article 16, paragraph 1, letter d) of the enabling law on tax reform – relating to new procedures for the attachment of financial ties – has been replaced. It is expected, instead of automation of processes, of which are
In accordance with Article 75-bis of the Decree, the attachment process for financial relations is also rationalized, computerized and simplified, through the introduction of an application support mechanism starting from the third party out-of-court declaration stage. 29 September 1973 The President of the Republic, N. 602, without prejudice to the forms of protection provided in favor of the debtor.
no forced withdrawal
In short, what does this change mean? Any risk of forced withdrawal from the current account is removed, The consolidation of collection activities, at this point, is particularly likely to pass through to go and simplify the proceduresIn any case, respecting the security provided for individual debtors.
The foreclosure process has been substantially updated, using computerized processes more efficiently. However, the most interesting thing is that we have officially moved from a clear indication of automatic withdrawal to a more general simplification.