Building bonuses, half of the deductions to the richest 10% of taxpayers. Positive effect of the Superbonus, but at a high price: over 110 billion for the State

Building bonuses, half of the deductions to the richest 10% of taxpayers.  Positive effect of the Superbonus, but at a high price: over 110 billion for the State

MILAN - Building bonuses are for everyone, but historically they have largely gone into the hands of a few. It is one of the data that emerges from the survey of the Parliamentary Budget Office, brought by the president Lilia Cavallari to the Budget Committee of the Chamber. Retracing what happened before the Superbonus, when tax credits first debuted with a "low" rate (41 and 36%) and were then gradually extended and strengthened, the PBO calculates that "dbetween 2008 and 2019, the deductions actually used increased from 2.6 billion to 9.2 billion, of which 7.4 for renovations and 1.8 for energy efficiency".

HOME EXPERT. Ask your question

The profile of who collects the deductions

From the tax returns it is therefore possible to trace the profile of those who have taken advantage of these deductions and the answer is that both "are highly regressive. Half of the total amount of deductions is in fact enjoyed by just over 10 percent of the richest taxpayersendowed with real estate assets and high income and who, having sufficient liquidity and fiscal capacity, can actually carry out the expenditure and deduct the deductions from the tax debt. Further confirmation comes from the territorial distribution of the deductions: in the period considered, over 60 percent of the deductions were used by taxpayers residing in the Northern regions". The 110% Superbonus has partly softened this distortion.

Superbonus 110%, the speaker assures: towards the extension for the villas

In fact, the Public Accounts Authority says that "lhe distribution of the concessions by Municipalities seems to indicate that the Superbonus has had a less regressive impact compared to the incentives previously disbursed and has allowed greater use by the less wealthy areas of the country, in particular in the South, which has seen its share of resources more than double". Therefore change the audience of beneficiaries and increase "significantly the use of energy saving concessions in lower-income municipalities, an indication of a less regressive nature of the Superbonus". However, there remains a greater incidence of recourse to the measure in the North-East of the country, with an average investment per inhabitant of about 1,379 euros, higher than the national average (1,160 euros) by about 19 per cent.

Effects centered, but at a high price: over 110 billion

In its analysis, the Upb reasons that in terms of effectiveness, "the works completed by the end of 2022 should lead overall, according to Enea estimates, to a minimum energy saving of 307 Kw/m2 on average. The objective set in the framework of the PNRR (to be achieved by 2025) in terms of buildings involved seems to have been achieved". But the objective was achieved at a very high cost for public finances. If the Ecobonus weighed in at in 2020, certified investments solely under the energy Superbonus as of February 2023 reached 68.5 billion, of which 53.2 billion were completed, corresponding to over 75 billion in tax credits accrued. dawn of the measure was 35 billion for the entire period of validity, has been largely scrapped: for the Upb the cost of the subsidies relating to the Superbonus, added to the other building bonuses, is destined to exceed the 110 billion already revised upwards in the Nadef from last fall.

Superbonus for the house, who uses the deduction how long does it have to complete the work?

edited by Antonella Donati

What has all this money brought to the Italian economy? The macro effects were "significant": the construction sector grew markedly in the two-year period 2021-22, more than that recorded in the other major European countries. However, it should be considered that construction was driven not only by the residential sector, but also by the non-residential sector and by public works. Furthermore, looking at the annual evolution, the activity for investments in homes was very marked in 2021, when the use of the Superbonus was limited, while it slowed down decidedly in 2022, when instead the incentive was used much more. Basically, the Upb calculates that the contribution of investments in residential construction to the growth of GDP in the last two years was two percentage points. Half attributable to the tax incentive, ie the additional investment in homes compared to what would have been made in any case in the two-year period in the absence of the subsidy (the so-called counterfactual scenario).

Source link