So far, building bonuses have cost the state 110 billion euros. While spending on the 110% (now reduced to 90%) super bonus alone was 61.2 billion, another 19 billion was allocated to the facade bonus promoted by former Minister of Wealth Dario Franceschini (Pd). exterior of buildings. Giovanni Spalletta, executive director of the finance department of the MEF (the ministry of the economy), gave the figures at a hearing in the Senate.
A lot of money, for example, considering that the highly controversial basic income costs around 8 billion euros in 2022. Just like the Rdc, the super bonus (the most expensive of the building bonuses in effect today) is an M5 measure, but unlike the subsidy, the subsidy for energy efficiency of condominiums and homes has received much less criticism and is indeed gaining a lot of attention. Number of supporters Among them is certainly not the former Prime Minister Mario Draghi, who is fighting to weaken this measure and limit the possibility of fraud to the State. Just like the absence of the current prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, who told Giuseppe Conte, the leader of the M5s, that the super bonus is not completely free, but instead “outweighs the state coffers by about 60 billion euros”.
How much we spent on benefits
But let’s briefly come to the figures drawn in the Senate. According to Spalletta, “In updating the trend estimates in Nadef, the estimate of super bonus and other construction bonuses has been increased to EUR 110 billion, with a deviation of 37.75 billion from the initial estimates for all temporal estimates”. Of course, we are talking about building bonuses as a whole. However, as we saw above, the super bonus and front bonuses are the most expensive privileges, with the former costing more than triple the latter.
It is a technical analysis by the MEF manager, clearly unbiased, but at the same time ruthless. “Despite the worthy objectives these subsidies seek to achieve, the management of building bonuses and their impact on the balance of public finances has become very complex in recent months and poses some problems due to the significant resources both expended and to be spent. Over the next few years, both the issues of transferability of loans as well as other abuse phenomena encountered especially in the second half of 2022″.
8-10 billion impacts per year on accounts expected by 2026
And then: “For 2023-2026, higher wages resulted in worsening direct taxes of between eight and ten billion euros each year. I still have data from Enea for the whole of 2022”. Translation: The extra expense to build the enormous amount of demand-fueled bonuses will cost us ten billion every year for the next 4 years. After all, 33.3 billion has been allocated for the super bonus, but the bill has already exceeded 60 and will be much more expensive. It is an expense that will be a burden on the shoulders of Italians.
But what is the reason for the deviation from the estimates? The answer is really simple. As a matter of fact, the General Manager of Finance evaluates that “taxpayers benefit from concessions much more than expected” and that “the concessions result in higher costs compared to the resources committed under the legislation in effect at the time of the concessions”. Compared to the super bonus and the frontline bonus, “the end of such conflict of interest between the customer and the contractor has in many cases meant an unfair increase in prices, which in itself has caused an intolerable economic situation.” distortion”. Added to this was the “fraud phenomenon” which made the situation worse.
As a result, the picture is rather bleak. And the budget is still partial. The estimation of super bonus fees actually “may be subject to further increases as we do not yet have data from Enea for all of 2022”.
What we still don’t know is which pockets all that money goes to, or which income classes really benefit from the substantial discounts on restructuring. In their initial formulation, there were no income requirements for both the frontline bonus and the super bonus, and one of the few limits limited to 110% incentive was the exclusion of luxury homes.
Positive effects on economy and environment
For the avoidance of doubt, it should be said that bonuses bring not only costs, but also benefits. Primarily for those who use it, but also for GDP and to a lesser extent for the environment. However, the extent of these benefits is difficult to assess. In particular, its impact on gross domestic product has been the subject of various estimates. According to Angelo Domenico Perrini, President of the National Council of Engineers, for example, the super bonus alone “contributes to the generation of more than 3% of GDP and investment in residential construction” and “1.1 billion cubic meters of gas energy savings, the country’s 48% of the energy savings targets it plans to reach this winter by 2022-2023”.
Other similar analyzes were presented last year, but the numbers did not always match. For example, for Giuseppe Conte, the leader of the M5s, the super bonus would contribute 22% to GDP growth in 2022. The data are cited in a study conducted by Cresme (economic, sociological and market research center for the construction industry) on behalf of the Roman builders association Ance Roma. How was this number obtained? It seems whoever did the study simply subtracted 114.1 billion from the gross domestic product in 2022 (1,896.2 billion) and in 2021 (1,782.1). The ratio between the super bonus and the additional investments made in 2022 (26.6 billion) versus the 2022-2021 GDP yields exactly 22%.
Concerns of the Bank of Italy and the Court of Accounts
On the other hand, both the Bank of Italy and the SAI have many doubts about these incentives (though it would be better to say about the way they are implemented). Accounting judges’ analysis has been harsh: According to a view made public last summer, the costs of building bonuses “in many cases constitute unjustified benefits for certain subject groups, always with undesired distributional effects.” they also include “a significant loss of income measured at some points in GDP”.
As for the impact on consumption, the Bank of Italy itself has so observed that “super bonus is not a viable way to tackle climate change” that, under current conditions, the Incentive would pay for itself in just 2,100, according to a study by the Bank of Italy. In our opinion, a simple number should be kept in mind: The amount of affidavits submitted so far is 372,303, which is equivalent to saying that only 3% of the approximately 12 million residences in Italy have undergone renovation.
Information collection questionnaire offered by Pd
Given the lack of consensus on the figures, the Democratic Party recently announced a survey on the “macroeconomic and public finance implications” of these concessions. According to Debora Serracchiani, “Today there are conditions to make a serious assessment of not only economic but also social and environmental costs and benefits. If we want to understand how far we’ll go or rethink some tools, we cannot go on saying ‘They’ today. “This survey is of great importance to us for all parliamentary groups. It’s a picture of a country that needs to run fast even using Pnrr funds. It’s geared towards energy efficiency and the ecological transition. That’s why we want reliable data.” The report containing the survey results could arrive in early March.
Source: Today IT
Roy Brown is a renowned economist and author at The Nation View. He has a deep understanding of the global economy and its intricacies. He writes about a wide range of economic topics, including monetary policy, fiscal policy, international trade, and labor markets.
