The Superbonus 110% needs a tune-up. The first stone in the pond was thrown by the Minister of Economy Daniele Franco, warning that in the long term the effect on public finances could be “stratospheric“. But in addition to costing the State a lot the maxi incentive, undoubtedly effective in boosting the construction sector by pushing GDP, is proving to be disappointing on the front ofenergy efficiency and high risk of speculations. As indeed Legambiente had already feared last year, at the time of the launch of the measure by the Conte 2 government. A confidential report by theEnea accounted for by the Corriere della Sera notes that the environmental effectiveness is “around 28% lower for every euro invested“Compared to what was obtained with the old ecobonus of 65% and that the cost for each single intervention” is doubled or even tripled“: Effect of a system that encourages over-billing, given that the public coffers pay everything and the consumer has no interest in negotiating on the price. For the deputies of the 5 Star Movement these are “questionable attempts to muddy an economic policy measure that has greatly contributed to restarting Italy “, but they recognize the need to” open a table with the Parliament and the categories concerned and in that forum analyze and overcome any critical issues“.

A few days ago the association Consumerism had highlighted that the measure “if on the one hand it represents an opportunity for citizens and a valid impetus for the economic revival of the country, on the other hand it is turning into an obstacle race for thousands of users and condominiums, giving rise to speculation and some cases to real scams“. Scams aside, and also taking into account the aincrease in the prices of raw materials which has international causes but is obviously amplified by the increase in demand, the consumer association reports for example that “if until two years ago the cost of a coat was approx 40 euro al mq today we also get to overcome the 100 euro per square meter “. Price increases confirmed by the Enea report quoted by the via Solferino newspaper: “The average increase on condensing boilers he was born in 286%, on solar shields he was born in 225% and on fixtures of the 208%“.

Inflated prices against which there is no significant reduction in the energy needs of buildings undergoing renovations. After all, to access the maxi bonus just one jump of two energy classes, and considering that in Italy the most widespread class is G, it is clear that the result will not be highly efficient real estate assets. From this point of view, the 65% eco-bonus was more efficient, according to the Enea report, perhaps because having to pay 35% out of his own pocket “the owner of a property had something to lose if his work had been carried out in a inefficient and at inflated costs ”, because for a third party he had to pay out of his own pocket without public compensation. From this point of view, the huge costs of the Superbonus – at 30 September the amounts admitted as deductions amounted to 7.49 billion and the total investments for completed works admitted to deduction was 5.11 billion – they risk turning out to be badly spent money, although they are undoubtedly driving the recovery. And this risks creating problems with the Commission EU, notes the Courier service, given that the incentive should be partially covered with funds from the Recovery Plan.

The deputies of the 5 Star Movement Riccardo Fraccaro, Luca Sut and Patrizia Terzoni announce that they want to “verify the existence of this study and its validity, but in the meantime the available and public data tell another story: the more companies born, the more busy, emergence of the submerged, revaluation of the building heritage, savings for families and benefits for the environment. An investment that also pays for itself in terms of tax revenues “. The only urgency, they say, is “to give certainty to citizens and professionals by regulating the details of the extension and the continuation of the other building bonuses “. But in the end they open up to the possibility of changes: “The government must immediately open a table with the Parliament and the categories concerned and in that forum analyze and overcome any critical issues”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.