Criminal shield on the Superbonus, the request of the institutes on fraud: no responsibility for the past

A more solid “shield” for the banks that will buy the substandard loans of the building bonuses in order to have those who presented the Cila complete the work before the entry into force of the provision that cancels the discounts on the invoice. Credit institutes, insurance companies, but also the post office and Cassa depositi e prestiti will have protection from seizures by the judiciary even for those credits that are the result of fraud that they have purchased in “good faith”.

These are significant figures, more than 6 billion euros. But it is one of the measures requested by the banking system and by the Post Office and which could already be discussed today at the government summit with Abi, Ance, Cdp, Sace, Confedilizia and other trade associations. “The question is under study,” confirms Andrea De Bertoldi of Forza Italia, rapporteur of the provision already sent to the Chamber for examination.

Superbonus 110, securitization hypothesis: what it is and how it works

THE CREDIT NODE

Once this shield has been obtained, the banks would be ready to reopen to the purchases of non-performing loans from companies. Once the invoices with the credit institutions have been discounted, condominiums and families will be able to restart the construction sites and conclude the works that have been frozen for months.

But how will the banks reactivate the discount ceilings considering that they have exhausted their fiscal spaces? Thanks to the limitation of liability (already introduced in the decree) and the shield on seizures (which should be introduced), they would be ready to give credit packages to their large corporate clients. A role in this sense could be played by the large public subsidiaries, from Cassa depositi e prestiti to ENI and RFI. «One thing must be clear», explains De Bertoldi who will be present today at the summit on bonuses, «for all those who have stranded credits and jobs on hold, this provision is an opportunity. I can assure you that the construction sites will be unblocked. But for those who have not yet approved the works», continues De Bertoldi, «the path will be that of deduction from income, therefore without a discount on the invoice. No one is harmed by the decree.”

Therefore, a clear line of demarcation remains: those who started the works before the entry into force of the provision will be able to obtain discounts on the invoice (and the banks will be able to resume purchasing). Those who didn’t move in time will still be able to access the tax bonus, but only with the deduction from income.
Another of the corrections that should be made to the provision is a sort of “boiler-saving” standard. The intention is to avoid a joke for those who bought a new boiler close to the decree. Normally, those who buy them pay an advance to the seller who issues a certificate of work only after having installed the system. This scheme would make those who have advanced the money, but have not yet installed the boiler, lose the possibility of the invoice discount. Therefore, access to the invoice discount should also be extended to all those who have paid the advances.

On the other hand, skepticism remains on the proposal, put forward by trade associations and by a cross-section in Parliament, to use the F24 compensations of bank customers to unblock problem loans. The rocks are many. The first: first a complete recognition of the credits is needed, to identify which ones are true and which are not. From the Accounting Office they point out that a skimming is essential before any intervention. In other words, solid companies must be safeguarded and not the myriad of “open and close” companies – there are around 12,000 non-certified companies born overnight according to MEF accounts – inaugurated with the sole aim of exploiting the advantages of Superbonus.

THE TAX CLIFF

Then there is a non-secondary cash problem. Already during the parliamentary debate on the FdI maneuver, he had presented an amendment proposing the use of F24s to unblock credits. However, withdrawn on input from Via XX Settembre: the operation simply cost too much. “We are talking about four, five billion euros a year of lower revenue for the public coffers, for four years”, explains FdI senator Guido Quintino Liris, first signatory of the withdrawn proposal and group leader in the Budget Commission. An unsustainable cost in a delicate phase for public finances, with a government looking for resources for a new business-saving decree for energy costs. Among those who follow the dossier in the majority, the hopes (at a flicker) are pinned on the proposal to have a part of the problem loans “absorbed” by state companies. Assuming that they are not considered as new debt and therefore a green light arrives from Eurostat. But here trust prevails: “We will have to start an interlocution with Eurostat, but during the last hearing in the Commission, for the 2021-2022 window, we had registered openings that now give us hope”.

Read the full article
on The Messenger