He Super bonus 110% from an estimated initial expenditure of 41 billion, it actually produced a real disbursement for the state coffers of around 86 billion. Ironically, only 110% more than expected.
He “free” of the Superbonus is described in black and white in the Mef file, published by the Chamber of Deputies after the hearing in the Budget Commission of the general director of the Finance Department of the Ministry of Economy, Giovanni Spalletta, who reported how the estimate of the Superbonus and other construction bonds had increased to around 110 one billion euros with a global deviation of 37,750 million euros with respect to the initial forecasts for the entire time horizon; In particular, the budget evolution forecasts for the 110% Superbonus stand at 61,200 million and those for the frontal bonus at 19,000 million.
In total, spending was 45.2 billion more than estimated. For this reason, “The government with transparency, coherence and responsibility is committed to ensuring a sustainable exit from measures that cannot be replicated in the same ways. The correction of the rules on construction bonds was the indispensable prerequisite for the protection of public finances by 2023, reversing a negative trend certified today by Istat “.
In short words: the Superbonus was a disaster for the State accounts. Going into detail, the average expense per intervention is still very high: on average more than 117,000 euros are spent on renovating a villa, which drops to 98,000 for functionally independent homes. For castles, the cost exceeds 139,000 and for condominiums it is around 611,000 euros. In total, interventions have already been carried out in 61,243 condominiums, plus 232,000 single-family buildings (villas) and 113,000 independent units.
With the Superbonus, six castles were also remodeled for a total cost of 839 thousand euros. And therein lies all the absurdity of a bonus proposed by those who later, on the other hand, say they want to distribute expenses, impose estates, help the poor and combat social inequalities. Because instead the superbonus gave money especially to the rich. A kind of patrimonial upside down. We give money to those who have the most.
always second the Mef file, “Regarding the economic quantification of the phenomenon, however relevant it may be, of the tax fraud found in the use of the different building vouchers, the Tax Agency reported that “the analysis and control activity allowed the identification of a total of tax credits irregular equivalent to 9 billion, of which approximately 3.6 billion are subject to seizure by judicial authorities”. To this must be added the hearing held by Pietro Tommasino on behalf of the Bank of Italy’s Economic Structure Service, on the cost-benefit analysis of the superbonus as a contribution to the environmental transition.
Second the bank of italy compared to the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, “the environmental benefits of the Superbonus would offset the financial costs in about 40 years.” In the Pnrr there are 960 million for university places; and 2,800 million for social housing. While for the Pnrr Superbonus there are 14,000 million euros, plus another 4,500 million from the Complementary Plan, and all the rest of the regular budget. Free. Then we move on to the chapter on scams. Oh yeah, because scams including windfall bonuses, frontage bonuses, and some other construction bonuses have cost the state $9 billion. “Regarding the economic quantification of the phenomenon, relevant as it may be, of tax fraud found in the use of different building bonds, the Tax Agency, during the hearing held in the VI Finance Commission of the Chamber of Deputies on 2 of March 2023, reported that “the analysis and control activity allowed the Tax Agency and the Guardia di Finanza to identify a total amount of irregular tax credits equivalent to 9 billion, of which approximately 3.6 billion subject to seizure by the ‘judicial authority'”.
The percentage breakdown of irregularities between the different types of bonus is represented in the following graph Mef file. Money from the pockets of citizens, squandered, as was the case with basic income, to fill those of unscrupulous scammers.
And as for the grant, even the grillino bonus has filled the news of these years. A few days ago, the last one: the Treviso prosecutor’s office ordered the seizure of 25 million in tax credits and assets worth more than 2 million, cars, money and real estate against a company born as a result of the law on the superbonus. In Turin, the yellow flames discovered a mega scam and seized non-existent credits worth 10 million euros, issuing precautionary measures for around 9 million. Then there was an incredible scam between Asti and Avellino: a figure that the judge defined as “unimaginable”, equivalent to three thousand two hundred million, was seized in Asti. The scam involved not only non-existent properties, but also those located in non-existent municipalities. These properties were owned by people without property in precarious economic conditions, criminals and even unsuspecting citizens.
An equally absurd scam took place in Avellino, with credit embargo amounting to 1,700 million euros. And again, there is the most emblematic case, which embodies the two symbolic measures of the Five Star Movement and the Government of Giuseppe Conte, which involved 143 natural and legal persons who had credits for 772 million euros seized. Among these subjects, up to 70% also received citizen income. Among others, some carried out illegal and mafia parking activities. We also note the presence of a prisoner from Santa Maria Capua Vetere.
One mechanism, that of construction bonds, with so many holes to leave a question open: incompetence or bad faith? Perhaps a mix of the two. Proposing a law without any type of control can certainly be the result of an inadequate ruling class, defending it despite everything, using it as a weapon in the electoral campaign as the Five Star Movement did, certainly responds more to the concept of bad faith than to naivety . Benedetto Croce said that the greatest form of dishonesty for a politician is incompetence. The years of Giuseppe Conte’s government have been plastic proof of how true this is.
As well as the ease with which money is disbursed in bonuses and grantsaccompanied by the incessant proposal of new taxes by a certain left – from the property tax to the attack on Italian homes staged with the display of students in tents, or even the fanatical enthusiasm for the European green directive – demonstrates how much part of this country remains unfamiliar with the concept of private property and respect for citizens’ money.
