The final word on the dispute over the payment of IMU for the former Misericordia and Dolce by the ASL Toscana Centro to the Municipality of Prato was put by the ruling of the Court of Cassation. The ruling, published on June 27, is clear: the health company will have to pay the IMU for 2014 and 2015, the two years contested by Sori, the body that collects the credits on behalf of the Municipality.
A story that for the two years in question involves an expense of a couple of million euros to be paid by the ASL. Not to think that in the future Sori could boast the collection of the following years, at least until 2020, the year of the demolition of a large portion of the old hospital. Area that, according to an agreement stipulated between the ASL and the Municipality, once freed from the health buildings, is destined to host the urban park. Urban park whose ownership will pass to the Municipality upon payment of 12 million euros to the health company.
A blow, that of the IMU, that the ASL tried to avoid by claiming that the former hospital building was a single structure together with the buildings still used for healthcare purposes.
The health authority had appealed against the payment of tax bills to the provincial tax commission, which was granted. The municipality then appealed to the regional tax commission, winning the appeal. Now, with the outcome of the Court of Cassation, the ASL has no choice but to pay the 2014 and 2015 payments, as well as pay the court costs and 14 thousand euros incurred by Sori for legal defense. The reasoning of the Court of Cassation refers to the legislative decree of 14 March 2011 number 23 (provisions on municipal fiscal federalism) according to which “properties owned by the State are exempt from the tax, as well as properties owned, in their own territory, by regions, provinces, municipalities, mountain communities, national health service bodies, intended exclusively for institutional tasks”. In this case, in 2014, the Misericordia e Dolce no longer performed an institutional function because it was decommissioned following the transfer of healthcare activities to the new hospital in Galciana between September and October 2013. And although the demolition was partial and healthcare services are still in operation in the remaining portion, the required ‘exclusivity’ constraint as well as the function for institutional purposes have lapsed under the law.
Sa.Be.
