The new ruling of the Supreme Court on joint accounts. planetcellulare.it
Joint account, here is in which cases the other spouse is required to pay Irpef on the sums used
A recent ordinance issued by Court of Cassation (number 25684 of 22 September 2021), has, in a certain sense, revolutionized and overturned some beliefs or practices regarding cjoint account, establishing that the money paid into that type of account belongs only to the person who paid it and not to the other co-holder. Therefore, if it were spent by the other co-holder, the latter would be burdened with the burden of having to pay the‘Irpef.
What the Supreme Court ruled
With the ruling in question, the stoats rejected the appeal of a man who had received an assessment on the money taken from the account jointly held with his wife, where only liquidity belonging to the latter flowed. The ruling is based on the fact that the payment of money into the joint account does not prove «the animus donandi», and that is the desire of the person who pays to give a gift to the partner.
The payment of money into a joint account, in fact, does not constitute according to the Supreme Court, an act of generosity in itself.
The act of joint ownership, with separate signature and availability, of a sum of money deposited with a credit institution in a joint account, does not in itself imply an act of generosity, if the existence of an “animus donandi” is not proven ”.
If the circumstances unequivocally supporting the immanence of a liberal spirit are not proven, the payment of liquidity into a joint account does not therefore imply the desire to attribute the availability of the money to the other joint account holder. From a fiscal point of view, the Court of Cassation also referred to thearticle 5, paragraph 1 of the presidential decree of 22 December 1986according to which even the proceeds deriving from illicit acts are subject to taxation, even when the taxpayer has received a sentence condemning the restitution of the sums illicitly collected and compensation for the damages caused.
In the case in question, the taxpayer had been sentenced by the civil judge to compensate the damages suffered by his wife for themisappropriation and arbitrary nature of money. The complaint resulted in the Irpef assessment notice which, after the stoats’ ruling, the husband will be forced to pay, regardless of the fact that the money spent belongs to a joint account.
The joint account does not protect you from tax assessments
It should be remembered that registering a current account in the spouse’s name does not protect the joint account holder from a possible tax assessment even when the two spouses are under a tax regime. goods separation. Often the strategy of the joint account is to evade any tax controls, in order to hide income received and not declared.
Sums deriving from illegal payments often flow into these accounts with the hope of being protected from possible tax assessments. In reality, the investigations are also extended to joint accounts and if the sum paid turns out to come from illicit transactions, the current account (even if jointly held) can be seized.
