The day of truth comes for the first 24-25 billion euro maneuver by the Draghi government. In the afternoon, the program budget document that will be sent to Brussels will reach the Council of Ministers (only the Italian document is missing from the appeal of the community this year), after the call of the political control room that was called this morning to appoint the latter. A word on open cases. First of all, the effort to reduce the tax contribution wedge on the business. Much will depend on the pro-growth strategy that Prime Minister Draghi and Economy Minister Franco have identified on several occasions as the primary task of the budget law.
The discussion around the tax wedge
Even if a few more days are required for the articulating section, it will be the Dpb tables that will provide x-rays of the weights assigned to the various components of the maneuver. The chapter for the tax wedge should be 8-9 billion, but debate is raging in the government about how to use it. To the extent that the table is dominated by the hypothesis of building a fund in the Budget Code aimed at reducing the tax burden, to be activated with subsequent implementation measures as has happened in recent years for citizenship income, the share of 100 and the bonus of 100 euros.
In any case, the discussion about the final destination of the resources is already open. The government is taking a stake in the idea of focusing money on lowering the IRPEF, in anticipation of a tax reform that will focus specifically on reducing the rate jump from 27 to 38%; So the first recipients of the intervention are 7 million Italians, most of whom are employed or retired, who report an annual income of between 28 thousand and 55 thousand euros.
Still with the goal of accelerating the main contents of tax reform, however, there is no shortage of proponents of a beginning focused on introducing IRAP. Irap’s farewell envisaged by the government “progressive overshoot” in the tax authorization that was approved two weeks ago but not yet sent to the departments, companies should avoid reducing to a simple substitution of the regional tax with an additional tax to the IRES. For two reasons. The first is a picture, because absorbing IRAP into IRES would increase the corporate tax rate and thus risk, according to critics, producing particularly negative reporting value in the eyes of foreign investors.
But there is also a more direct practical question. Since IRAP is currently being paid by almost all companies, including loss-making companies, which nevertheless do not pay IRAP. This causes no small problem for the Department of the Economy, which has to cover its expenses with a tax paid by fewer companies than those affected by IRAP. After all, the ambition necessary to abolish IRAP can actually be measured by a flat number: 12 billion, which is currently paid by private subjects (the PA’s IRAP is instead just a game round in terms of fiscal balances). On the other hand, a similar number would put a hand in a really important way on the personal income tax ladder.
“Internet trailblazer. Travelaholic. Passionate social media evangelist. Tv advocate.”