Sit is the name of the new integrated system of the Revenue Agency which, starting from 1 February, will bring together in a single digital platform all the data (deeds, cadastral values, documents, maps, satellite images) of over 74 million properties throughout Italy. With this system you will be able to view online all the tax information relating to a specific property, but above all you are equipped with a fundamental tool for a possible future reform of the cadastral system, a fundamental step to change the taxation on real estate.
In fact, the Revenue Agency is able to assign an indicative value of the market value of any property, because it has the disaggregated data of all the deeds, because it has refined the price surveys over time and has very sophisticated cartographic systems which, in part, the telematic services of the Agency make available to individual citizens. With all this paraphernalia, making real estate and fiscal values consistent from a technical point of view is not insurmountable, but so far the facts have shown that it is from a political point of view. A small excursus can help to understand why.
History of a reform that never took place
The tax values are based on the so-called cadastral rents, which represent the rent that from a theoretical point of view (very theoretical) can be deduced by renting a specific property. The incomes, with some exceptions concerning the prestigious areas of the big cities, are still those defined at the end of the 1980s, on the eve of the introduction of the ICI, the progenitor of the IMU. Romano Prodi both times he was a tenant of Palazzo Chigi tried to change the system; in 1997 he could only indiscriminately increase all cadastral income by 5% and in 2008 he had to surrender at the early end of the legislature. A subsequent enabling law gave the government the possibility of giving the green light to the reform, but when it was possible to proceed, the Executive led by Matteo Renzi stopped everything.
The criteria of greater equity
The reform envisaged by the delegation would be based on criteria of greater equity than those currently in force. In the first place because the surface of the dwellings is evaluated based on a mysterious entity such as the cadastral space and not with the square meters (a criterion instead adopted for non-residential properties). To give just one example in Milan, a house with 4 cadastral areas can measure 40 as 60 meters. On the market it makes a big difference. So why didn’t we proceed? Because by changing the system and adopting a criterion, we repeat it by far more equitable, with a value calculated on the basis of the market, the invariance of tax revenue for the State, despite the fact that the politicians on duty have always proclaimed the opposite, impossible to obtain. Either a safeguard clause is introduced whereby those who would pay the most can calculate taxes with the old system with obvious losses for the public purse, or the taxes end up increasing. Certainly in big cities and a lot for homeowners, while shops and offices there may be a drop in the tax base.
Registration tax at 115.5%
Those who own a house can easily realize how much taxation on their home could change if the cadastral value were replaced by the market value, albeit with downward corrections (at the time of the Delegation Law, a 30% reduction on the market). An indicative evaluation to obtain it by comparing the average values of the estimates with the average sales values of the properties, using for both the data of the Revenue Agency. We tried to compare the values of the 20 most populous Italian cities, considering three different situations: the purchase of a first home, a second home, the payment of the Imu. We remind you that the taxable value for registration tax purposes is equal to 115.5 times (estimate multiplied by one percent increased by 5% and by a further 10%) in the case of the purchase of a first home, by 126 times (estimate per cent with 5% plus another 20%) for the second home and 168 times (estimate per cent, plus 5% plus 60%) for the Imu.
The cities with the greatest increases
As we can see from the table, the city among those selected would record a greater increase in the Messina taxable, where the difference in value between the market price and the taxable first home exceeds 300%. While for the IMU it stops, so to speak, at 176%. The capital with the smallest difference is Padua, where the gap with the current Imu taxable amount is only 17%. In Milan the difference is just lower than that recorded in Messina, with an IMU value 172% lower than the market price. In the capital, this gap is reduced to about 60%.