Superbonus, Marattin: ‘very badly managed, scoundrel choices

The government handled the superbonus game very badly, opting for “scoundrel” choices. So in an interview with Adnkronos Luigi Marattin, deputy IV and former president of the Finance commission in the Chamber, unreservedly rejects the decree that blocks the sale of building credits, tomorrow to the final vote in the first reading in the House.

Cancellation tout court it’s only about the assignment of the credit and the discount on the invoice – observes Marattin – and it was made necessary by the decision of Eurostatwhich classified those tax credits as ‘payable’ and therefore ordered their full accounting in the year in which those credits arise”. It means, he explains, “that if we had continued with the old methods, public finances would explode even more than they already have. Having said that, the government handled this game very badly.”

For Marattin and his party, Italia Viva, “the executive following the deletion of these tools he should have done two simple things to minimize the impact on households and businesses: first, move the date after which the transfer was no longer permitted to 30 Marchin order to save families and businesses that had already planned the works and, according to, above all, should have allow banks to offset tax credits through customers’ F24sin order to restart the market for the purchase of problem loans”.

“In place of these two necessary things – the economist insists – the government has made two scoundrels: it has allowed a partial exchange between unused credits in 2022 and BTPs in 2028, moreover leaving it to the future legislature to cover the cost of those debt issues. And finally, he made a few confused hints about ‘I don’t-know’ what private platform that should buy the credits and then resell them close to maturity”. How to say: “a set of random words that
looks like
no more to the things a says

inI divide in a confused state
than to a serious activity of governance of complexity”, concludes the deputy of Italia Viva.

For the future, according to Iv, “a single and structural (in the sense of stable over time) subsidy is needed, at a sustainable percentage, in order to give certainty to the market and to economic operators. No more time-limited subsidies which are then extended to finally, enough with the dozens of rule changes within a few months, enough with the gifts at the expense of the taxpayer”, concludes Marattin.