PUGLIA – Incomes are decreasing, families are in difficulty and in the meantime bills are increasing. Also that on the Imu, the single municipal tax which represents one of the main real estate taxes in Italy, applied to a wide range of properties, including second homes, luxury properties, appurtenances and other real estate categories such as building land and commercial properties.
As the deadline for the payment of the IMU advance for 2024 approaches, set for 16 June but postponed this year to 17 June 2024, Italian taxpayers are preparing for this important tax obligation. Well, according to what was ascertained by the Economic, Fiscal and Social Security Policies Service of the Uil in the 2024 IMU Report, the overall average cost of the IMU for a second home, in a capital city, will be 1,022 euros this year (of which 511 for the June deposit), with peaks of over two thousand euros in large cities.
The payment of the IMU advance is based on the rates and deductions established by the Municipalities for the previous year, while the balance, scheduled for 16 December 2024, will include any adjustments based on the new rates approved by the Municipalities and published on the website of the Ministry of Finances
Puglia is the third region in Italy for the impact of IMU on family income. With a GDP per capita of 21,589 euros and an average IMU of 1,597.61 euros, the pressure exerted on incomes is equal to 7%. Only Campania (9%) and Sardinia (8%) do worse.
«A reform of the land register is needed to make property taxation fairer. The tax burden hanging on Apulian families is already too high. It is indicative to note that the greatest burden is recorded precisely in the southern regions, where the per capita income is lower and the burden of taxation has the greatest impact”, explains Gianni Ricci, general secretary of Uil Puglia, commenting on the results of the analysis conducted by the Service economic, fiscal and social security policies of the Uil coordinated by the national secretary Vera Buonomo in the Imu 2024 report which highlights an unfair system that penalizes the southern regions above all.
The report focuses on IMU costs for first luxury homes (category A/1, A/8 and A/9) and for second homes.
In the first category, compared to a national average of 2,531.07 euros, none of the Apulian provinces is among the ten most expensive, nor among the ten least expensive.
However, in Bari you pay an average of 3,108.58 euros per year. In Brindisi 2,726.39, in Lecce 3,086.10 and in Taranto 1,482.68.
If instead we focus on the cost of the IMU for a second home, Bari appears among the ten most expensive cities, in eighth place in the national ranking with an annual cost for the single municipal tax of 1,435.25 (after Rome, Siena , Padua, Livorno, Verona and Cagliari). Even in this subcategory, no Apulian province appears among the ten least expensive. In Brindisi it costs 1,023.29 euros, in Foggia 1,054.98 euros, in Lecce 1,052.75 euros and in Taranto 1,006.12 euros.
Appurtenances are also subject to IMU. Looking at those relating to the first luxury homes, Bari rises to fourth place in the national ranking with a yearly cost of 177 euros compared to a national average of 99.10. In Brindisi the taxpayer pays 75.43, in Foggia 139.02, in Lecce 127.99 euros and in Taranto 88.60 euros.
The IMU rates, approved by the Municipalities, have been identified and reported for both the main luxury residence and the available homes. From this analysis it emerges that in 18 cities the former Tasi surcharge is in force, which brings the rates beyond the maximum IMU threshold for available second homes, set at 10.6 per thousand. These include Brindisi with an additional 11.4 per thousand, Lecce with an additional 11 per thousand, while Bari, Foggia and Taranto are at the maximum limit set by law (10.6 per thousand).
It is significant to analyze the percentage relationship between the average annual cost of the IMU and the GDP per capita of the individual regions to understand the fiscal impact of the IMU in Italy.
«Puglia is the third region in Italy for the impact of the IMU on taxpayers’ income, an unsustainable situation. This is why we ask for a reform that takes into account the disparities between the various regions, which is proportional to the real value of the properties and the contributory capacity of the subjects, taking into account the specificities of the territories” concludes Ricci.
