Taxes like blows on the house, which rage on an already depressed market and on a sector that is worth 20% of the national GDP. "It rains in the wet - observes Gualtiero Tamburini - while Monti could have expected a maneuver that took into account the characteristics of this market".
Tamburini, professor, former president of Nomisma and former head of the observatory on the real estate market of the Bologna study center, has been dealing with "houses" for many years, a competence that earned him the presidency of the Authority for the sale of properties of social security institutions . Today he observes the financial package from the top of Federimmobiliare, a federation that brings together associations and companies working in this area.
Professor la Borsa celebrates the choices of the Monti government, was it the right cure for Italy?
It is a cure according to tradition. Once again the house, the primary asset of Italians, takes the lion's share, given that the action on real estate is worth around 7 billion euros. Unfortunately, this is an intervention with little equity. Higher rates are introduced for second homes and cadastral values are raised, without taking into account the abysmal differences that exist between the different areas of the country. Some annuities are close to reality, but others, especially in big cities, are light years away from reality. No mention is made of a revision of the estimates, a coefficient is established and spread over all, without thinking of a rebalancing on the territory. Unfortunately we are faced with a structural intervention, not a one-off choice. A patrimonial one that left room for subsequent actions was better. I hope there will be a way to review these assessments
In this context it seems to me that historic properties, the most beautiful ones, pay less, why?
Their income is equivalent to the lowest in the area. There is the presumption, in general, that maintaining a listed property costs more
Do you think the higher tax burden will lower property prices?
Probably yes, prices will still go down.
Could this restart the trades?
This is generally not the case. Fiscal tightening affects expectations, we become even more pessimistic about the future and buy less. When prices rise, investors are attracted because they can get a good deal. In Italy the income deriving from the house has always been harassed, but in the phase of rising prices a revaluation of the property is expected. Now expectations are negative and there won't be a great desire to lose further money. Furthermore, this maneuver comes at a stage in which the market is already depressed, therefore, it rains on wet days. And it affects a sector that has, directly or indirectly, about 3 million employees and which is worth 20% of the Italian GDP. The first sector of the country and all internal. If what we propose to lower is the debt/GDP ratio, we have not taken the best route. The home sector is complex and includes many things, from furniture to energy. Consider that half of the country's energy consumption is in this area and you understand what it can mean to put your hand to saving energy. But today we need money and we don't look at things so subtle. However, I repeat, a property was better than a structural intervention like this. I hope the game is still open.
Does this maneuver on the house affect individuals as well as companies?
I think so. And it affects the banks, whose credits are largely secured by properties that are depreciating. It is a sector that needs credit more than others.
Was there no way to make cash by selling some of the public real estate?
There is an infinite number of possibilities for enhancing public real estate assets. However, I don't think that the government's interventions stop here, we will see if there will be more in the coming weeks
Are there big investors ready to buy in Italy today?
No, there is no liquidity and foreigners don't trust us. Even the ranking disclosed a few days ago on corruption puts our credibility at risk. Last year a reform of real estate funds came out that changed the cards on the table for those who had invested here and who now, of course, don't consider us a serious country.
Did you expect anything more from a government of technicians?
I expected a greater contextualization and that is the ability to take into account the nature and characteristics of this sector.
