Share

Berlusconi legacy: his children aim to avoid inheritance taxes. For Fascina the 100 million in 2 installments

Silvio Berlusconi's heirs have asked the Revenue Agency not to pay inheritance taxes on their shares in the Fininvest empire as they have pledged to maintain control for at least five years. What the 1990 law says

Berlusconi legacy: his children aim to avoid inheritance taxes. For Fascina the 100 million in 2 installments

Having fully accepted the legacy of Silvio Berlusconi, we now move on to defining the details, which at this moment bear the name of inheritance taxes e testamentary legacies.
For the first time the heirs asked theInland Revenue the exemption in relation to the shares of Silvio's four holding companies which own 61,2%. Fininvest, valued at 432 million. They may have won, as there is a rule in their favor 1990 reform on inheritances: for transfers of company shares and shares to descendants of companies or branches thereof, the heirs are not subject to inheritance tax if they continue to carry out the business activity or maintain control over it for less than five years. And this is precisely the case of Marina, Piersilvio, Barbara, Eleonora and Luigi Berlusconi who they signed il lock-up period in the shareholders' agreements: essentially the control structure is armored not only of the holding but also of the main subsidiaries Mfe (the former Mediaset) and Mondadori, which therefore cannot be sold for five years.
The armoring of Fininvest will then be further sanctioned in the next few days in the extraordinary meetings of Biscione and the various Italian holdings to amend the statutes and include the provisions of the shareholders' agreements, including those on the distribution of mandatory minimum shares of dividends. However, the lock-up agreement and the pact between Marina and Piersilvio which binds them to vote jointly on the various resolutions will remain outside the statutes.

The related dossier: 100 million in 2 installments to Marta Fascina

But we also got to the details that concern testamentary legacies. There are three, for a total of 230 million euros left by Silvio Berlusconi to his partner Martha Fascina (100 million), al brother Paul (100 million) and to my lifelong friend Marcello Dell'Utri (30 million).
Of the three bequests, however, the most sensitive for family relations is that of Marta Fascina, who still lives in the villa in Arcore where she does not leave due to the strict mourning, so much so that she was publicly rebuked by Paolo Berlusconi himself: "Enough with the tears, I also told Marta that she is inconsolable, but that she must find the strength to return to Parliament because it is her right but above all her duty". Fascina is a deputy on the Forza Italia list.
The substantial legacy in favor of Fascina had been arranged by Berlusconi with a holographic will, on the occasion of his hospitalization on January 19, 2022. The family is thinking of liquidating the amount in two tranches, within a few months of each other. A commitment to which all five children made themselves available, including Luigi who technically, not being mentioned in the holographic will, could have declared himself extraneous to the commitment towards Fascina.

Legal action is expected instead against the Colombian will

Instead, the Berlusconi brothers are ready to form a united front and take legal action against the non-holographic will which would have been signed by the former prime minister in Colombia and which would arrange a legacy in favor of the Turin naval entrepreneur (resident in Colombia) Marco Di Nunzio. According to what was communicated, it would concern "2% of Fininvest, 26 million euros, 100% of the shares of the companies that own the villas in Antigua in the Antilles, the ship Principessa Vai Vai Bandiera Monaco Yacht and all boats, ships and vessels". Di Nunzio had a moment of notoriety in Italy when, in 2013, he ran for president of the Lombardy region with the “Forza Juve-Movimento Bunga Bunga” list, later excluded from the commission of the Milan Court of Appeal due to alleged irregularities in signatures.

comments