However, there is a background noise, almost ideological, which is not convincing in the government’s fiscal policy. The first clue came with the infamous one tax on banks’ extra profits. He wanted to give the idea that the government was closer to the local markets than to the financial ones. If the government had wanted to recover precious resources from the banking sector it would have achieved more by agreeing with the system, than by imposing an overnight tax. Carlo Messina, Giuseppe Castagna, Alberto Nagel, Andrea Orcel and the Treasury appointee, Luigi Lovaglio, all heads of the most important Italian banks, would have been willing to provide resources in a less traumatic way. That’s it the tax on extra profits will only produce a few million in revenue, since all credit institutions will adopt the alternative measure (and introduced later to pick up the pieces) of putting resources into capital instead of paying taxes to the Treasury. But a small amount of reputational damage still occurred.
Another clue: the return of the brains. Deputy Minister Leo is correcting some errors made in the first drafts. But despite all the changes it seems that a cap on the tax discount remains. Let’s explain better. The brains (and not just brains) who return to Italy enjoy a super discount. The size of the discount can and perhaps should be discussed. But why completely exclude those who earn more than 600 thousand euros from the discount? It is precisely the latter who we should attract: they are the ones who buy houses, use services, spend and evidently have such skills that the market overpays them.
These first two clues concern the creme de la creme of taxpayers. Unfortunately, the Budget reveals further ideological prejudices. The government has done well to reduce taxes on the weakest groups. Thanks to the Irpef reform, taxpayers are helped up to 28 thousand euros and thanks to the intervention on the tax wedge, workers are helped up to 35 thousand euros. Furthermore, cuts to the lowest pensions are reduced. Well. At a time of high inflation and with few resources, it is right that the weakest take 15 of the 24 billion from the finance company.
But with what sinister logic do you want to increase taxation on those who have their own home with a short-term rental? If not that of take away resources from the middle class. Why reduce the revaluation of pensions exceeding 5 thousand euros per month, that is, precisely to those who have paid the most contributions during their working life. Why want to scrape together a few pennies from the IMU on foreign houses. Why actually introduce a new tax for businesses called compulsory catastrophe insurance?
The feeling is that little consideration is given to the middle class, those who earn more than 50 thousand euros gross a year or who have a second home. Not to mention the actual rich and businesses, for whom there is no lawyer who cares. Of course, these are not large numbers. But that’s exactly why it’s scary. It seems more like an ideological battle than a concrete issue. More of a small disfigurement than a real cash reason.