The superbonus? the choice is between disaster and transferability
The Superbonus soap opera goes on. First also praised by Brussels as a way to stimulate growth and the famous "Ecological Transition", now it has become the absolute evil. Yet if Italy has a slightly better growth than Germany it is also due to this instrument which has stimulated the construction sector. It stimulated it even too much: perhaps instead of 110% a 80%-90% was enough, but whoever created it wanted to be able to say that it paid the whole State, and even more, and this sent optimization to the brink.
Now we are faced with the problem of repaying the credits created by the bonus which, if we are to believe Il Sole 24 Ore , is equal to 109 billion euros. A little more than any maneuver you can put in place. Even just thinking of magically increasing revenues by 109 billion, or reducing expenditures by the same amount, even dividing everything over two or three years, is bizarre at the very least, especially in politics.
Not repaying these credits, in addition to violating the promises of the state, which is not exceptional in the EU, will cause a wave of insolvencies at a time when the economic situation is turning decidedly ugly. By now the effects of the stimulus are wearing off, it wouldn't be very lucid to add a credit crisis, caused by a wave of construction bankruptcies, to a recession already upon us.
I know that this will greatly displease certain circles of the MEF, but there is only one solution to the problem: give a long term, seven or ten years, to the repayment of the credits and in the meantime securitize and allow the transfer of the tax credits now created.
Someone will choke on the morsel because they will say "Eh, but we are creating money", but in any case it would be a fixed-term currency, in the sense that the maneuver would have a deadline. The transferability would allow, by paying suppliers and employees, to avoid the bankruptcy of companies due to lack of liquidity. The long-term horizon would make it possible to amortize the sales over time. In any case, the transfer by endorsement would guarantee the transparency of the transfers.
There are no problems of a technical nature, on the contrary it would be interesting to adopt some innovative solutions, while the only limitation on movements would be the limitation of circulation on a national basis. A ten-year horizon would allow the credit bomb to be defused, also because inflation would allow its real weight to be diluted. Indeed, inflation would favor its circulation.
The alternative is to sharply cut the resources available for public spending, ie investments and social spending, precisely in the year of the European elections. A sensational own goal for whoever presents himself as a candidate on this occasion. Would it be easy for a majority politician to ask for the vote by presenting a package of cuts in pension, social or security spending? Wouldn't you rather come up with an innovation that saves goat and cabbage anyway?
I'm asking for a friend. if then this solution can make someone feel bad, they can always take an antacid. There are excellent ones in the pharmacy.
Thanks to our Telegram channel you can stay updated on the publication of new articles from Economic Scenarios.
The article The superbonus? the choice between disaster and transferability comes from Scenari Economici .
This is a machine translation of a post published on Scenari Economici at the URL https://scenarieconomici.it/il-superbonus-la-scelta-e-fra-disastro-e-cedibilita/ on Tue, 05 Sep 2023 10:00:19 +0000.