The new Taxpayers' Statute 2024, how does the Tax Office change?

The new Taxpayer Statute came into force on 18 January 2023 with the changes made by Legislative Decree 219 of 2023.
The conflict between the tax authorities and the taxpayer has been strengthened, protections have increased with the introduction of a monocratic body called the National Guarantor and revision of the Question, these are the main news.
Since taking office, the Meloni Government has reiterated one of the fundamental pillars of its work plan: no more vexatious taxes towards taxpayers.
The first step towards this easing of relations was represented by the fiscal peace provisions included in the 2023 budget law, despite the much confusion generated between the various institutions, of which the most important are the quater scrapping and the removal of tax bills up to 1,000 euros, these measures are having their effects.
The second step is the modification of the Taxpayer's Statute, the fundamental law of the Italian State for the protection of citizens, provides for the strengthening of the cross-examination in favor of taxpayers and the revision of the sanctions in order to adapt to those applied within the EU and in order also to adapt to the ruling of the Constitutional Court 46 of 2023, which underlined the oppressiveness of our disproportionate sanctioning system.
Here's how the Taxpayer Statute changes.
The new Taxpayers' Statute 2024, how does the Tax Office change? Reform of the Taxpayer Statute Has the vexatious tax and taxpayer relationship been overturned? Taxpayer's Statute: with obligation to state reasons Preventive contradictory Taxpayer's Statute: the new rules of the Taxpayer's National Guarantor's Interpellation New Taxpayer's Statute: the principle of self-protection strengthened Reform of the Taxpayer's Statute In implementation of the enabling law for tax reform, Legislative decree 219 introduces a reform of article 1 of the Taxpayer Statute (law 212 of 2000).
The new text provides that the rules of tax law "conform to the provisions of the Constitution relevant to tax matters, to the principles of the European Union legal system and to the European Convention on Human Rights".
It also intervenes on sanctions, establishing that measures to combat tax avoidance and evasion and the principle of proportionality will also be applied to tax sanctions.
The tax procedure balances the protection of the revenue interest in the collection of the tax with the protection of the fundamental rights of the taxpayer, in compliance with the principle of proportionality The importance of the term "fundamental rights" must be underlined, in fact it is a particular category that is strongly protected, to understand we can make use of the definition of Luigi Ferrajoili (jurist and former magistrate), who maintains: they are "fundamental rights" all those subjective rights that are universally entitled to "all" human beings as they are endowed with the status of persons, or citizens or persons capable of acting; "subjective right" means any positive expectation (to benefits) or negative (to non-injuries) ascribed to a subject by a legal norm, and by "status" the condition of a subject also foreseen by a positive legal norm as a prerequisite of his suitability to be the owner of legal situations and/or the author of the acts which are the exercise thereof" These are therefore rights with strengthened protection, such as the right to a name, to the protection of property…
a sort of untouchable nucleus.
Finally, in the text in the Council of Ministers it says In accordance with the principle of proportionality, the administrative action must be necessary for the implementation of the tax, not exceeding the objectives pursued and not limiting the rights of taxpayers beyond what is strictly necessary to achieve of your goal.
Has the vexatious tax and taxpayer relationship been overturned? Let's say that generally in tax claims greater importance has always been given to the public part, i.e.
the Tax Office, as it pursues objectives of public interest worthy of greater protection compared to that reserved for the private sector.
However, over time, the application of this principle has led to a sense of mistrust on the part of the taxpayer which, combined with the high tax pressure, has generated the feeling of being faced with a sort of "expropriation".
This effect is strengthened when shock final results are achieved with self-employed workers, professionals and businesses burdened with overlapping bureaucratic burdens, obligations and payments, perhaps even in times of economic crisis to which is added, in some cases, a collection difficulty of accrued credits.
The Government's objective should be to reverse this factual situation, streamlining the procedures (simplified declarations) and with an assessment and jurisdictional phase that equalizes the position between the tax authorities and the taxpayer and therefore alleviating the feeling of being harassed by the tax authorities.
read also Capital in sight, Fornero's forecast: this is why it is necessary Taxpayer's Statute: with obligation to state reasons The fundamental core of the tax delegation law, to be implemented with various legislative decrees, remains the protection of the fundamental rights of the taxpayer, thus to give greater importance within the tax procedure to the taxpayer and placing him on an equal footing with the "public part" of the relationship.
In the new text, cross-examination is strengthened through a strengthening of the obligation to provide reasons for tax assessments with the indication, from the moment of preparation of the assessment document, of all the evidence against the taxpayer so that he can develop a adequate defense.
It must be underlined that the new Statute provides that the regions and local authorities, in regulating the administrative procedures within their competence, cannot establish lower guarantees regarding compliance with the principles of adversarial proceedings, access to administrative tax documentation, protection of trust, the prohibition of bis in idem, the principle of proportionality and self-defense, but may provide for additional levels of protection (article 1, paragraph 1, letter a, numbers 3bis and 3 ter, decree 219/2023).
Preventive cross-examination The changes to the system require the financial administration to draw up a draft provision before adopting the definitive measure.
The same must be made available to the taxpayer who is granted a period of no less than 60 days to submit his observations.
Within the same period the taxpayer can access and extract a copy of the documents in the file.
Only after the expiry of this deadline can the Administration adopt the definitive measure which, however, must take into consideration the findings made by the taxpayer.
The measure adopted without respecting these rules is voidable (article 1, paragraph 1, letter e) of Legislative Decree 219/2023, introduces article 6 bis of law 212 of 2000).
However, the legislative decree provides for an exception: there is no right to be heard for automated documents, such as those issued following formal automated control of declarations.
In short, whoever receives the document must not only know from the beginning all the charges against him and the evidence in the hands of the financial administration, but must also have the time to respond in an equally analytical way.
At this point comes another important innovation provided for by the tax delegation law, in fact, following the submission of observations, the Tax Office has the obligation to expressly justify the observations made by the taxpayer.
Article 12 paragraph 7 of the Taxpayer's Statute currently in force, however, provides: the taxpayer can communicate observations and requests within sixty days which are evaluated by the tax authorities.
without therefore providing for the obligation to provide a response to the taxpayer.
It seems clear that this entire interview phase has a deflationary effect on the tax dispute because it is a communication prior to a possible appeal and aims at a collection that is more responsive to the real situation of the taxpayer thanks to greater attention to his reasons.
The plan to review the procedures with greater protection for the taxpayer also includes the hiring and strengthening procedures implemented by the Revenue Agency with hirings that should coincide with the entry into force of the new rules.
read also Public competitions, what we know about the 4,100 hirings announced by the Revenue Agency Taxpayer's Statute: the new Interpello discipline One of the tools most used by taxpayers in recent years is the Interpello.
This is a tool through which the taxpayer can directly ask the Tax Office for a response regarding concrete and personal cases.
For example, he can present his case and ask whether norm Revenue Agency.
The contribution is intended to finance initiatives to implement training for tax agency staff.
The reason is to avoid excessive recourse to requests for rulings which in fact require officials to provide answers which in reality are frequently easily available through circulars and standard documents.
The Administration, without prejudice to the right to request additional documentation, responds to requests for rulings within ninety days.
The deadline is suspended from August 1st to the 31st of the same month.
The submission of a request for ruling does not lead to interruption or suspension of the limitation periods and the response to the request for ruling cannot be contested.
The Statute provides for trade associations, trade unions, professional associations and administrations the possibility of requesting legal advice, a figure similar to the Interpello, these are interpretative clarifications not referable to the individual taxpayer.
For smaller taxpayers and natural persons there is instead simplified consultation through the online services of the Revenue Agency.
National Taxpayer Guarantor The new Taxpayer Statute provides for the establishment of the National Taxpayer Guarantor.
It is a monocratic body based in Rome, chosen and appointed by the Minister of Economy and Finance.
He remains in office for four years, but the position is renewable (only once).
The Guarantor is chosen from among magistrates, university professors of legal and economic subjects, notaries, whether in service or retired, lawyers, retired chartered accountants and collegiate accountants, designated in a trio formed by the respective national associations to which they belong.
What is the role of the National Taxpayer Guarantor? Upon written notification from the taxpayer, the Guarantor may: make recommendations to the directors of the tax agencies for the purposes of protecting the taxpayer and improving the organization of services; access the offices in order to check the functionality of the services and the quality of the assistance provided to the taxpayer and the usability of the spaces; remind the financial offices to respect the taxpayer's right to information and the rights of the taxpayer subject to tax audits as well as to respect the deadlines for tax refunds.
The National Taxpayer Guarantor reports every 6 months to the Minister of Economy and Finance on the activities carried out.
He must also report to: directors of tax agencies; General Commander of the Financial Police.
In the report he must highlight the critical issues identified and propose solutions.
However, annually it reports to the Government and Parliament on the state of relations between the tax authorities and taxpayers.
New Taxpayer Statute: the principle of self-defense strengthened Self-defense is an institution known to Public Administrations.
It provides that, when they realize that they have made an error in an act, they can cancel it automatically.
With legislative decree 219, article 10 quater is introduced into the Taxpayer Statute (law 212 of 2000).
The same provides for the obligation of self-defense, without request from a party and even while a judgment is pending, in the event of manifest illegitimacy of the act due to error: of a person; calculation; on the identification of the person; clerical error by the taxpayer, easily recognizable by the financial administration; error on the basis of the tax; failure to take into account regularly made tax payments; lack of documentation subsequently remedied, no later than the deadlines where applicable under penalty of forfeiture.