Among the many amenities contained in the contract of the yellow-green majority (actually the Lega under Salvini's regime adopted the color blue for its symbol) there is a quotation mark like "fiscal peace”. Let's read the text word for word: "It is appropriate - it is written - to establish a "fiscal peace" with taxpayers to remove the economic imbalance of the obligations undertaken and to favor the extinction of the debt by means of a balance and write-off of the amount due, in all those exceptional and involuntary situations of proven economic difficulty. Excluding any condoning purpose, the measure can become an effective aid to citizens in difficulty and the first step towards a "friendly collection" of taxpayers".
Moreover, in commenting on the measure in the televised debates, the Northern League experts attribute it to this measure revenue of 35 billion to partially cover the 50 billion needed to launch the flat tax. It is not my intention to demonize the choice to start with an amnesty, while pointing out the criticisms that have always been confidential - with particular enthusiasm from the pentastellati - towards measures (see lastly the so-called scrapping of folders) that had the appearance, even remotely, of an amnesty.
I limit myself to relying on the fact checking of the authoritative The Voice-Info, who wrote in this regard: «According to the League, proposing to those who owe a debt to the tax authorities a tax discount from 75 to 94 percent is not a tax amnesty. Strictly speaking, and by definition, it is indeed».
The more debatable question is who it is an ad hoc amnestyof dubious constitutional legitimacy. To make use of it would be those taxpayers who pay in "exceptional and involuntary situations of proven economic difficulty". What all this means is not easily understood, even if the Sherpas of the Northern League have provided some explanations: "involuntary" would mean that the taxpayer has presented the tax return punctually (which so don't be an evader) but what is not found in the material conditions, due to "demonstrated economic difficulty", to pay the tax due.
Between the lines we read that "effective help" should be reserved to ordinary citizens holders of modest economic activities, even if one wonders if it could not happen that also a large company you also run the risk of getting into trouble with the taxman.
But let's go ahead and ask a few questions: what would be the “economic difficulties” deserving of protection; maybe even a wrong investment or a very expensive legal case? AND how would this difficulty be demonstrated? There will be some Commissions which judge case by case in an unappealable way or will be allowed the appeal by administrative means or even to the ordinary judge?
If these candidates for the Nobel prize for economics expect to collect so many billions it means that the amnesty will affect millions of taxpayers. It has been said that it will look at the family composition, as if a large nucleus were allowed not to pay taxes despite the tax breaks it enjoys.
Then let's not forget that this provision would come after the conclusion of the operation "scrapping of folders” to which more than two million taxpayers have signed up, whose applications are now under consideration. In essence, it would rain in the wet.
The pantomime of the savers-investors of Banca Etruria and of the other bankrupt credit institutions would be repeated on a large scale. According to a months-long debate in which talk shows gave the worst of the worst, those people deserved compensation from the state … for their gullibility. Also in that case, a Commission was set to work, chaired by Raffaele Cantone, the new Hero of the Two Worlds, with the task of evaluating the cases to which a partial reimbursement should be granted. Nothing more was heard of it. But if it is not possible to manage a 300 million operation (how many were allocated in that circumstance) who will be that phenomenal genius able to juggle amidst (only presumed) 35 billion in the total amount of 50 billion, also only presumed?
