The State does nothing to increase the quota of 8 per thousand that flows into public coffers every year, while the resources destined for the Catholic Church continue to multiply in silence. This was revealed by the Court of Auditors, which today published a report on the "destination and management of the 8 per thousand" paid every year by Italians.
The document shows that, in 2014, the "attributed amounts" reached their quota 1,278 billion euros. Of this sum, allo State they just went 170,347 million, While the Catholic church obtained 1,054 billion: more than five times the 200 million collected in 1990, the debut year of the 8 per thousand.
One might think that this disproportion is the result of a free choice by Italian taxpayers, but other numbers reveal that this is not the case. According to an elaboration by the Court on data from the Revenue Agency, in 2011, the last year for which data are available, the share attributable to the Catholic Church on the basis of the choices expressed by Italians was equal to 37,93% (against the 6,14% of that attributable to the State), while the sum actually paid reached 82,28% of the total (compared to 13,32% collected by the State).
The multiplier effect arises from how they are distributed the 8 per thousand of taxpayers who they have not indicated any recipients. The report, quoting a text from the Presidency of the Council, explains that "the percentage of preference for the choices expressed determines the allocation of funds deriving from the choices not expressed". In short, the entire amount of 8 per thousand is distributed every year in proportion to the preferences of those who have indicated a beneficiary, while those who have not specified anything contribute only with money, in most cases without knowing that their money is not they go to the state, but are divided up based on the choices made by others.
"There is no transparency on disbursements, there are none verifications on the use of the funds disbursed, nor Checks on the correctness” of the taxpayers' indications, “nor a monitoring of the actions of the intermediaries”, comment the accounting magistrates, underlining that “the beneficiaries receive more from the unexpressed share than from that” voluntarily allocated by the taxpayers (54% against 46%) . On this aspect, according to the Court, “there is no adequate information, although those who do not choose are the majority and one can reasonably be led to believe that only with an explicit option will the funds be assigned”.
A lack that is not exactly irrelevant, given that every year the sums at stake "well over one billion euros”, bringing Italy to the top of the European ranking for this type of contribution. "In the current contingency of a very strong reduction in public spending in every field - writes the accounting judiciary again - these resources are the only ones to have significantly and constantly increased".
The Court then denounces a heavy waste of resources by the state, who "shows disinterest in the share of his competence, which has led to the drastic reduction of taxpayers in his favor, giving the impression that the institute is only aimed at acting as an apparent counterweight to the direct financing system of confessions".
Magistrates cite four factors that contributed to this situation:
1) the total lack of promotion of the initiatives of the State, which not even this year has bothered to sensitize public opinion, despite the new possibility of allocating resources to school construction.
2) The diversion of funds received by the State for different budget purposes, if not antithetical, compared to those requested by taxpayers. Over the years, the distraction has involved more than two thirds of the sums awarded and in two cases (2011 and 2012) the public quota has even been cancelled. This year, of the 170 million forfeited, the State has spent just 400 thousand euros for the purposes for which the 8 per thousand was intended.
3) Having channeled many resources to religious entities.
4) The lack of coherence of the choices for sprinkler delivery to often private entities.
Attachments: The report of the Court of Auditors.pdf
