Cancel or at least revise the Superbonus for villas: while the final text of the maneuver in Parliament is still awaited, the pressure of the parties rises to cancel the 25 thousand euro ceiling of Isee for access to the 110% discount also for the owners of single-family homes. But at the moment, according to what is learned from various government sources, the ISEE limit is still there and the game will reopen with the amendments. The measure will instead be revised, as confirmed in recent days, upon the transfer of the credit and the discount on the invoice, which will be extended for all bonuses, and not just for 110 as envisaged in the drafts.
The Cna, however, insists that limiting the number of Superbonus beneficiaries to 110% and weakening the facades bonus are in open contrast to the expansive orientation of the maneuver launched by the Government and penalize above all the system of micro and small businesses: “The bonuses for energy requalification and for the enhancement of buildings are producing very positive effects on economic growth. Therefore limitations that reduce the number of beneficiaries are incomprehensible ”.
In particular, Cna expresses «opposition to the introduction of the Isee roof to enjoy the extension of the 110% Superbonus in reference to the individual real estate units and functionally independent buildings. There is also opposition to the elimination of the right to transfer credit on other bonuses for construction ». For the Confederation, «continually modifying the measures generates uncertainty and confusion with the effect of slowing down the virtuous path. Instead, it is necessary to give continuity to the system of incentives and to fix any regulatory evolution within a certain time frame ”.
For Stefano Fassina, deputy of the LeU and former deputy minister of the economy, “the discussion on the introduction of the ISEE for the 110% Superbonus must be taken seriously. In the initial phase, to give a powerful input to the economy affected by Covid, it made sense to exclude limitations. Now and in perspective, we must avoid that huge public resources have such a regressive distributive impact: who has more, spends more and takes more from the rest of the citizens. Thus, public intervention, instead of reducing them, widens inequalities. But the ISEE limit does not make sense to introduce it only for single-family houses. On the other hand, it is useful to raise the income ceiling for access to the bonus and extend this ceiling to all beneficiaries of the bonus, regardless of the characteristics of the home. The resources saved should be dedicated to compensating for the impact of the increase in energy costs for low- and middle-income households ”.
The 5 Star Movement, on the other hand, asks the Government to eliminate “already today in the text that will go to the Official Gazette the forecast of the Isee ceiling and the retroactivity of the communications of the start of works and authorizations linked to the Superbonus 110%”.