Superbonus 110: errors, paradoxes, dangers and remedies
What to do on the Superbonus 110%. The intervention of Sergio Pizzolante, entrepreneur and former parliamentarian
The paradoxes and dangers of 110.
For a few weeks, many companies, tens of thousands, which under a state law have made contracts, made purchases, hired people, carried out jobs, in exchange for paper, convertible into money, guaranteed (in theory) by the state, risk the failure.
The Cna says 33 thousand companies. Companies in the construction, plant engineering, energy efficiency, materials and engineering sectors. All. By September.
How could that happen? Why does this happen? And why does the government seem to be looking elsewhere?
It is as if a large tractor, engaged in plowing a huge field, long abandoned, such as that of construction, suddenly, instead of moving forward, would tip backwards, overwhelming with it, under it, the driver and those behind him. try to sow fruit in the plowed land.
The government risks repairing a mistake with a bigger mistake. Gigantic.
Let's face it, 110 is a conceptual error.
You cannot eliminate the competition from the market.
The buyer cannot be made an accomplice to the seller.
If the buyer spends nothing or thinks he does not have to spend anything, because the state pays, he spends everything, more.
If he has no interest in comparing prices, prices go where they want.
But if you think you can manage this inconsistency by increasing the walls of the bureaucracy you get two things, the explosion of prices and a lot of people who specialize, with few scruples, in jumping walls. By any means.
When 110 was born it was clear that a great public finance problem would arise. Financial hedging.
But even though he was warned, whoever had to be warned, he went ahead.
"Revolutionary" spirits were in motion, the basic idea was that every individual could not work, to have an income and that if by chance, he had a job, he could retire earlier and thanks to the State he could even rebuild his house free.
This cannot be the case. Logical.
But those who (fortunately) came to extinguish the "revolutionary boils", Draghi and Franco, were all wrong on this point. Sorry to say. To whom, like myself, is a more than convinced supporter of Draghi a Franco.
They had to say a simple thing: this system, like this, does not hold up.
For public finance and for a matter of economic and social hygiene.
What was already in place had to be saved and a new strategy had to be given for the medium and long term.
More precisely, for example, 110 becomes 70/80, for condominiums, and is extended, as a field of application, to 50, for company warehouses, campsites, hotels, sports facilities.
Private individuals thus know that nothing is free and businesses return to investing to redevelop buildings.
The opposite has been done, the system has been kept alive, throwing tons of sand into the gears to slow their running.
With constantly changing rules and with incongruous interpretations of the same.
Up to the present seizure.
With companies that have seen the values of credits held in their stomachs turn into toxic waste. Mortals.
Another huge inconsistency.
The possibility of using the 110 has also been extended to public housing.
They are highly deteriorated, often peripheral public goods. It is a huge problem of quality of living and quality of life. Of marginalization. Safety. Of energy consumption that is no longer sustainable.
Well, they are public assets managed by public structures. To take advantage of the bonuses, they must start public tender procedures. Long times.
Well, originally, 6 months more had been foreseen, compared to private individuals, for the completion of the procedures.
With the extension to 2023, 6 months less have been foreseen (60 percent of the work must have been completed by June 2033). What does it mean?
Many races will not start, many works will stop in the middle. With further degradation. A delusion.
This drift must be corrected.
An amendment that tries to find a solution is under discussion within the Aid to the Chamber. Rapporteur of the law is Alessandro Cattaneo. The amendment is supported by all groups, led by the President of the Productive Activities Commission, Martina Nardi.
It is an ambitious amendment, but I think there is no lack of means of political mediation for a short-term solution, in a longer and more systemic perspective. Wider.
Sergio Pizzolante
(Entrepreneur, former parliamentarian)
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/economia/superbonus-110-gli-errori-i-paradossi-i-pericoli-e-i-rimedi/ on Sun, 26 Jun 2022 12:24:08 +0000.