Purely theoretically and with a strong provocative streak, it is as if our tax authorities had 161 cards on each of us where our income capacity, consumption and level of wealth are faithfully reported. In other words, we are sure of one thing: the tax authorities are not lacking information on taxpayers. In fact, on a daily basis, the Financial Administration receives and catalogs billions of data of all kinds which, however, only a small part is able to "use", in particular, to successfully tackle one of the main problems that afflict our country: 'tax evasion.
The CGIA Studies Office reminds us that our tax machine has a first-rate Tax Information System (SIF), made up of 161 databases. Well, can we say that we live in a tax police state? Absolutely not, God forbid. But those who are “registered” suffer from a fiscal oppression that has no equal in the rest of Europe; while those who "wallow" in the underground economy have very little chance of being sanctioned.
It is true that these databases should soon begin to communicate with each other, that is, to be interoperable. However, if every year the people of tax evaders subtract almost 110 billion euros from the tax authorities and our 007s managed to recover it, in the pre-Covid period, between 18 and 20, it means that, potentially, we know life, death and miracles about who it is. known to the tax authorities, while we are groping in the dark towards those who are not, with the result that tax evasion prospers, penalizing excessively those who pay taxes to the last cent.
Let's be clear: these databases do not have the sole objective of allowing the tax administration to fight tax infidelity more effectively. They are tools that also serve to elaborate very complex economic and statistical analyzes, estimating the effects of fiscal policies in progress in a scenario characterized by increasingly interconnected phenomena. However, if tax evasion is one of the country's main problems, it is clear that these tools should constitute the essential toolbox for building a fairer and more equitable taxation.
• Not even the Stasi had a control capacity like ……. our taxman
Games, remote betting, sports betting, lotteries, monopolies, tobacconists, anti-fraud, anti-money laundering, concessions, refunds, liquidations, tax returns, VAT and IRAP returns, electronic invoicing, VAT fees, urban land registry, real estate auctions, real estate market, vehicles , register and succession, local taxes, excise duties, bank or postal coordinates, etc., are just some of the 161 tax databases coordinated by the Department of Finance. It is clear that the long eye of the taxman has no boundaries and with the related database is able to catalog and retrieve any economic transaction in detail. Jokingly, of course, we believe that not even the Stasi (the political police present in the former GDR) had the ability to control every aspect of the life of East Germans, as our financial administration is potentially able to do with all of us. Nothing escapes the radar of our tax system. Everything is tracked, unless the transaction takes place outside the legal circuits. So, there is no database that holds: the tax evader has a very good chance of going unpunished.
• Less taxes and abolition of the balance / deposit system
If the presence of a large number of integrated data is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition to put the tax authorities truly at the service of the citizen-taxpayer, it is equally essential to take action on at least 2 other fronts: reduce the tax burden, perhaps zeroing it out. for the current year to all the very small activities; simplify the tax system, especially for our SMEs. On the occasion of the next tax reform, the CGIA Studies Office hopes, for example, that the current system of advances and balances will be eliminated, allowing companies to pay taxes only on what they have actually collected. A transparency operation that would make it possible to move from a system of withdrawal on presumed collections to one on actual collections, eliminating not only the system of the balance and advance payment, but also the formation of tax credits and the consequent expectation, by companies, of the tax refunds that often come with unjustifiable delays.
• A convoluted mechanism that penalizes everyone
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 "down payment" for the payment of taxes that they will be paid in the following year.
In other words, 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 the Synthetic Reliability Indices have been drawn up), while - for the other taxpayers - the first installment corresponds to 40 percent of the amount due and the second to 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. The situation, in fact, is only balanced when there are no obvious differences in income from one year to another, but when this is not the case, as happened between 2019 and 2020, 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 are 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 why the taxman does not reward income growth, but rather penalizes it.
