The tax on ruins
And what are these collaborating buildings? The Department of Finance itself explains this in the text in its response to municipalities greedy for assets. These are “dilapidated properties, ruins, or real estate characterized by a notable level of degradation, which determines the lack of functional autonomy and the temporally relevant inability to generate income”. Having made this clarification, the Ministry’s response regarding the hypothesized taxability of these properties is clear: “The solution adopted by the Municipalities and reported in the question under examination cannot be considered legally valid”.
Well, at least we escaped that one. We also lacked the rubble tax. Beyond the law, however, the issue is political, and even more so, common sense. Is it possible that certain municipal administrations are so thirsty for money that they even claim to tax ruins, i.e. properties (90% belonging to natural persons) that end up in dilapidated conditions due to the passage of time or, even, as a consequence of concrete actions by the owners (for example, the removal of the roof) aimed precisely at avoiding at least the payment of the capital on real ballast?
Taxes, taxes and taxes again
Furthermore, according to the latest data from the Revenue Agency, relating to the state of Italian real estate in 2022, the number of these properties increased by 2.7% compared to the previous year. But the most alarming data emerges when the pre- and post-IMU numbers are compared: since 2011, properties reduced to ruins have more than doubled, going from 278,121 to 610,085, with an increase of 119%. Faced with this disastrous situation, the only thing that comes to mind for certain municipal administrations is to tax?