Just a few lines. But, if they actually come into force, it will change their relationship forever tax and taxpayers. in favor of the latter. “The taxpayer has the right to participate in administrative procedures aimed at issuing an assessment or collecting taxes.” and again. “The instrument issued in violation of the previous paragraph is void.” In short, therevenue agency Before sending an attachment document to any taxpayer, he must listen to the latter and assess, before making any claim, whether there are elements in his “defence”. A real revolution.
The taxes here are the fake poor: 3 million evaded from 264 billion. The tax authorities are considering an amnesty to recover the money
The two paragraphs are included in tax process reform proposals prepared for the government by the Interministerial Commission on Tax Justice Reform. A body set up by the Minister of Economy Daniel Franco and the Justice Department Marta Cartapia, led by Professor Bocconi Giacinto della Canaña, but which also included the Chief Financial Officer of Mef, Fabrizia Lapicorella, and the Director of ‘Ernesto Maria of the Rovini Revenue Agency. The Commission’s proposals should be incorporated into the financial mandate that the government is preparing to approve by the end of September, as envisaged in commitments made with Europe in the recovery plan. Unless the government itself decides to give a different course to the proposals by including articles in some of the items already examined by Parliament. But why did the Commission take this step in the interest of taxpayers? The main reason is to try to reduce the tax dispute between the tax authorities and the citizens who pay taxes to the foundation. If the taxpayer has the opportunity to defend himself before the assessment or collection action becomes final, the issues between the administration and the citizens are likely to be reduced.
Tax bills, deadline calendar: the first is on us
In fact, the principle that the tax authority, before passing a law, must listen to the taxpayer, had already existed for some time in the Italian legal system. It goes back, as the report accompanying the commission’s proposal explains, to the 1997 law. Yet, as often happens, the law remained essentially a dead letter. In fact, applicable law states that if the estimate is “partial,” the tax authorities are not obligated to question the taxpayer. In practice, management offices have always been sufficient to “classify” assessments as partial to avoid prior confrontation. Also because for taxpayers the litigation route is generally considered an “expensive” one. As Uncat, the National Federation of Tax Lawyers Chambers, has pointed out, for some time, even when he’s right, the taxpayer is often “reimbursed” for court costs. This means that the money spent on the attorney and the trial itself, is not charged to the tax authorities in the field, but remains the responsibility of those who initiated the dispute even though they were ultimately right. Indeed, in the last annual report of the Ministry of Economy in June 2021, it was found that in 2020 at the Regional Tax Commission, the taxpayer was ordered to pay 30.3% against 14.8% of the Revenue Agency, but the expenses were compensated in 54.9. %; In the regional commission, their percentages were 27.1% and 12.2%, and compensation was awarded in 60.8% of cases. In order to reduce the dispute, the Commission also suggested that in the first stage, before the commencement of the trial, the judge could attempt to reconcile the parties. Those who refuse to conciliate may be forced to pay, in the event of a loss, court costs increase by 50%.
“Internet trailblazer. Travelaholic. Passionate social media evangelist. Tv advocate.”