The discount on the invoice
This year the number of tax deductions for home interventions has been enriched with an additional bonus. The Growth Decree (Law 28 June 2019, No. 58) in fact provided for the possibility of opting for an immediate discount on the invoice equal to the value of the tax deductions envisaged for energy redevelopment and reduction of seismic risk. In other words, those who carry out energy redevelopment and seismic risk reduction operations on their property to opt, instead of tax deductions, for a contribution of equal amount, in the form of a discount on the amount due, anticipated by the supplier who carried out the interventions.
So who replaces the fixtures, the heating system or installs a condensing boiler or even those who carry out consolidation of their home, instead of having the tax deduction at 50, 65 or 85% (depending on the interventions) it can transfer the benefit to the seller or to the supplier of the intervention which thus makes an immediate discount of the same amount on the invoice. The discount that can be obtained is equal to the deduction to which one would be entitled for the interventions of energy redevelopment and reduction of seismic risk, based on the expenses incurred by 31 December of each year. The amount is calculated taking into account the cost to be paid including the amount not paid due to the discount. Payment must be made by bank transfer from which the reason for the payment must appear, the tax code of the beneficiary of the deduction and the tax code or VAT number of the supplier.
Based on the feedback we receive from readers, at the moment there are few companies willing to give the discount in exchange for the credit transfer.
The engineer Giuseppe Bencivenga – Oknoplast reference figure for the Italian market – gave an interpretation of the current situation.
I believe that the first reaction, a clear outcry from everyone with respect to the decree as soon as it was presented, could certainly be shared as the transfer of the Ecobonus credit to the sole seller with the discount on the invoice, without the possibility of a further transfer, made the law difficult to use because the limited fiscal capacity of the seller would not have allowed a real market development, even for medium to large companies.
Why has the world of door and window manufacturers and distributors continued to strongly oppose the law?
Sand to be honest, I still can't fully understand it. When a law of the State allows the consumer to replace the doors and windows of his own home
without having to pay the entire amount in advance and then see it returned in 10 years, but at a discount
50% immediate, I really can't understand why the opinion of most of the
operators of the sector has not changed. I believe that the only reason why this happened is due to the fact that, as in any market subject to a sudden change, the times of reaction and deep understanding of all the implications, although extremely advantageous for all, can be not short. Moreover probably the other operators are not strongly focused on the energy efficiency of the condominiums as in the case of Oknoplast.
This is demonstrated by the fact that the first reaction of many producers, even primary ones, was to do
add to your contractual terms and conditions that the company would not accept the assignment of the credit from its dealers. And I must say that even leading magazines have not focused on the positive aspects of this law (market development and consumer benefits) but have only fueled this controversy.
I believe that the duty of an entrepreneur is to ensure profits for his company by reducing risks as much as possible and creating value for his customers. Ignoring a state law without fully understanding the implications is risky and it is therefore not possible to blame other competitors if they have worked hard to follow the directives.