The ecobonus is one of the most important tax breaks for those who carry out energy requalification interventions on buildings, offering deductions that can reach up to 65%. However, among the obligations to be respected to obtain this benefit, there is the sending of the communication to ENEA within 90 days of completion of the works.
But what happens if this requirement is not met? A recent ruling by the Turin Tax Commission has established that failure to communicate does not automatically entail the loss of the right to the deduction.
This verdict raises a series of crucial questions: what exactly does the law provide and what risks do those who forget this formal step run?
Let’s find out together what the law says and what the concrete implications are for taxpayers.
Advertisement – Advertising
The absence of an automatic forfeiture
Sentence no. 727/ of 01/2024 issued by the First Instance Tax Commission of Turin has brought to light a fundamental point of the legislation on the ecobonus. In particular, it has established that the failure to send the communication to ENEA, required within 90 days of completion of the worksdoes not automatically lead to the forfeiture of the right to the tax deduction.
The decision is based on the analysis of the rules governing the matter, namely Article 1 of Law No. 296/2006 and Article 14 of Legislative Decree No. 63/2013.
In fact, none of these texts explicitly provides for a loss of the right to the deduction in the event of failure to send the communication, which led the Court to believe that there is no direct link between the communication and the forfeiture of the tax benefit.
Advertisement – Advertising
The Court’s Reasoning: The Importance of the Right to Deduction
The Court of Turin based its decision on two main reasons. First, it emphasized that no specific rule provides for the forfeiture of the right to deduction in the event of failure to send the communication to ENEA.
This principle has been strengthened by a recent ruling of the Court of Cassation (no. 7657 of 2024), which established that formal non-compliance does not necessarily entail the loss of the tax benefit, if the expenses incurred are actually worthy of relief.
Secondly, the Court recalled a resolution of the Revenue Agency (no. 46/E of 2009), which classifies the communication to ENEA as a formal obligation. However, it is important to specify that this resolution refers to the interventions provided for by the “home bonus” and not to the ecobonus.
In the case of the ecobonus, in fact, the Agency subsequently clarified that the communication has a constitutive nature of the right to the deduction, making it an essential requirement to benefit from the relief, as highlighted in circulars no. 13/E of 2013 and no. 17/E of 2023.
Advertisement – Advertising
The jurisprudential contrast and the different interpretations
Although the decision of the Court of Turin seems to open a new path for taxpayers, the case law on the matter is far from unanimous. For example, the Court of Cassation, with order no. 34151/2022, confirmed the position of the Revenue Agency, according to which failure to send the communication to ENEA can lead to the forfeiture of the right to the deduction.
This orientation has been recently re-proposed also with ordinance n. 15178/2024, confirming the importance of formal compliance to obtain the ecobonus.
However, several Courts have issued rulings in favor of taxpayers. Among these, we find the rulings of the Tax Commission of Florence (ruling no. 141 of 03/2023), of Reggio Emilia (ruling no. 46 of 01/2024) and of Lombardy (ruling no. 1125 of 2023). These judicial bodies have held that, in the absence of a clear and stringent regulatory provision, failure to send the communication should not lead to the forfeiture of the benefit.
On the other hand, contrary decisions, such as those of the Tax Commission of Lazio (ruling no. 4178 of 04/2024) and of Trentino-Alto Adige (rulings no. 35 of 01/2020 and no. 20 of 01/2021), confirm the more rigid line supported by the Revenue Agency, underlining how failure to communicate is a reason for loss of the benefit.
Advertisement – Advertising
Conclusion
The debate on the failure to send the communication to ENEA and the consequences on the ecobonus deduction continues to divide the Italian courts. While some rulings, such as that of the Turin Tax Commission, recognize the importance of the principle according to which the failure to formally comply should not automatically lead to the loss of the tax benefit, other decisions follow a more rigorous line, in line with the indications of the Revenue Agency.
Faced with this uncertain jurisprudential scenario, it is essential for taxpayers to carefully follow regulatory and jurisprudential developments to avoid sanctions or tax recoveries. Furthermore, it is always advisable to comply with all formal obligations, such as timely sending of the communication to ENEA, to avoid possible complications.
