There will be no added or penalizing taxation on the severance pay. There are no longer any doubts on this point: the mechanism by which the tax on severance pay is determined remains the one in force. This was confirmed by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni who responded with a vitriolic post to the accusations – also from the opposition – of having got her hands on the severance pay of Italian workers.
The misunderstanding about severance pay
The fears were linked to the repeal of a safeguard clause which allows in certain circumstances to resort to the 2006 Irpef rates and brackets if more convenient for the worker. The possible repeal of the law would have had effects (in reality limited) only for fairly high incomes, but it has now been established that nothing will change for anyone.
Already yesterday Il Sole 24 Ore noted that the possibility of “applying the most favorable taxation” will remain “fully operational”, as emerges from “a careful reading of the new Consolidated Law on Income Taxes”.
Meloni’s post: “Don’t they know how a consolidated text works?”
Now Giorgia Meloni also comes to clarify. Who writes on his social media channels: “I read some posts by leading exponents of the Democratic Party and I honestly don’t know what is more serious: whether, when they wrote them, they were aware that they were telling something false or whether they weren’t. They tell us that from 2027 the Government would have made the safeguard clause on severance pay disappear, with a ‘silent blow’ to the detriment of workers. And to demonstrate this they triumphantly cite the repeal provided for by article 376 of the Legislative Decree 117/2026”.
“There is only one small problem” objects the prime minister. “What they are citing is a consolidated text. And in the exact same decree, before arriving at article 376, it would have been enough to stop at article 21”. In fact, as indicated by the Prime Minister, the rule in question appears in paragraph 11.
“So what really happens?” Meloni wonders. “A very simple thing. The Consolidated Law rearranges the regulations, reproduces the safeguard clause in the new legislation and repeals the old provision it replaces. Instead, they take the repeal of the old law and present it as the abolition of protection”.
In short, the misunderstanding has been clarified. The TFR is safe. But the leader of FdI does not give up on removing a few pebbles from her shoe. “Are they on an election campaign? Don’t they know how a Consolidated Law works?” you ask. “I fear it’s much worse: that they haven’t even read the provision they’re commenting on. Because it would have been difficult to get to article 376 without realizing that article 21 denies the whole story. And these gentlemen are politicians and exponents of the institutions of the Democratic Party.”
