To ask again is the CGIA: for SMEs, 2021 must be "tax free", the only possibility to allow these activities, exhausted by the negative economic effects linked to the pandemic, to take a breath and reschedule the recovery. The coordinator of the Studies Office declares Paolo Zabeo:
"Excluding local taxes, the Italian tax free year would cost the state coffers up to 28 billion euros. A frightening figure which, of course, could be reduced by allowing the tax burden to be zeroed only for activities with revenues below a certain threshold or based on the loss of turnover. Even if the lost revenue were 28 billion euros, this amount would still be lower than the aid granted directly to the production system this year and which so far amounted to around 30 billion. With the tax free, small entrepreneurs would be relieved from the burden of an often unfair tax, for a year they would live with less anxiety, less stress, more serenity and confidence. Not only that, but with 28 billion saved we would lay the foundations to restart the country's economy ”.
The CGIA points out that never as in this moment would we have the need to reset taxes for the whole of 2021.
"Only with a tax free 2021 and a strong injection of liquidity - declares the secretary Renato Mason - we can concretely help our business fabric and above all the world of micro and small businesses. Otherwise, we risk an unprecedented death that will desertify many production areas and as many historic centers of both small and large cities, undermining the social cohesion that is the pillar on which the economy of our country is based. To avoid all this, however, we must act quickly. Many artisans and small traders are exhausted, but they can still recover if the Executive will be able to give them answers in a reasonably short time. That is, allowing him to cancel the taxation, to have a less oppressive bureaucracy and to have sufficient financial resources to overcome this situation of serious difficulty ”.
In terms of revenue, the CGIA Studies Office estimates that the Treasury would lack € 28,3 billion divided as follows: Irpef 22,7 billion; 4,2 billion IRES; 779 million of substitute tax paid by VAT numbers that have joined the flat-rate scheme and 500 million euros of Imu on category D warehouses.
According to the CGIA proposal, businesses with less than 1 million euros in turnover would no longer pay the tax authorities, while continuing to pay local taxes so as not to put the Municipalities and Regions in further difficulty. The latter, therefore, would continue to collect their amounts which would amount to 3 billion IRAP; 2,5 billion Imu; 1,6 billion regional income tax surcharge and 610 million euro municipal income tax surcharge. Overall, therefore, SMEs with less than 1 million turnover next year would thus pay 7,7 billion euros to the local authorities.
The tax authorities must also be simplified
In addition to zeroing the state taxes for 2021, the CGIA invites the Executive to simplify the tax system for our SMEs. As also hoped for in recent months by the top management of the Revenue Agency, it would be necessary to eliminate the current system of advances and balances, allowing companies to pay taxes only on what they have actually collected. A transparency operation that would mark the transition from a levy on presumed collections to one on actual collections, eliminating not only the balance and down payment system, but also the formation of tax credits and the consequent expectation, by companies, of refunds.
The convoluted mechanism of the balance / deposit
In Italy, the basic principle is that the artisan or small merchant does not pay taxes only on what he declared the previous year, but also on what he earns in the current year, as a "deposit" for the payment of taxes that they will be paid in the following year. That is, it goes into credit (or debit) with the taxman for the annuity that is yet to come. In principle, this system provides for the payment of taxes to the Treasury in two installments: the first between the end of June and the beginning of July, the second by the end of November.
The amount of the advances is equal to 100 percent of the tax due for the previous year and is usually paid in two installments in June and November. Both are the same for "ISA subjects" (ie those who carry out economic activities for which Synthetic Reliability Indices have been drawn up), while for other taxpayers, the first installment corresponds to 40 percent of the due, and the second at 60 percent.
This mechanism generates a situation of scarce transparency and often creates financial problems, because it is difficult for the entrepreneur to predict how much he will have to pay. In fact, the situation is only balanced when there are no obvious differences in income from one year to another, but when this is not the case, things get complicated.
In the event that the income is lower than that recorded the year before, the entrepreneur goes to credit, as the tax advances have been calculated on a higher income. If, on the other hand, there is a strong increase in income, the situation is reversed. The taxpayer goes into debt and on the June deadline is required to pay a very demanding tax balance, because the advances calculated the previous year were underestimated. This explains the reason why the tax authorities do not reward income growth, but rather penalize it.