Italy: Robin Hood Tax on energy companies declared illegitimate

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Italy: Robin Hood Tax on energy companies declared illegitimate

foglia.jpg

dayala.jpg

Giuliano Foglia


Giovanni d’Ayala Valva

With the February 11 2015 decision n. 10/2015, the Italian Constitutional Court declared the 'Robin Hood Tax' unconstitutional. The removal of the Robin Hood Tax is being welcomed by energy companies, since it determines a significant reduction of the tax burden (from 34% per cent to 27.5%) and boosts earnings. The Robin Hood Tax was introduced in 2008 as a surtax on certain companies operating in the energy sector to rein in what was considered an excessive profits from high oil prices. Starting from 2011, it became applicable also to companies active in the renewable energy sector

In a nutshell, the Robin Hood Tax consisted in a surcharge of 6.5% of the ordinary corporate income tax rate and it was applicable to companies that exceeded certain financial thresholds.

With the decision n. 10/2015 the Constitutional Court upheld the taxpayers' claim and declared Robin Hood Tax in breach of the principles of equality and ability-to-pay established by articles 3 and 53 of the Italian Constitution.

In particular, the Court underlined that: (i) Robin Hood Tax was supposed to tax extra-profits but it actually taxed the overall taxable income; (ii) the intention of the legislator was to introduce a temporary surtax to face specific economic circumstances but it has become an ordinary corporate income tax for energy companies, without any specific link with the taxpayer's ability to pay; (iii) notwithstanding the express ban provided by the law, the impossibility to prevent companies from shifting the burden of such tax onto consumers was proved.

According to decision n. 10/2015 the declaration of unconstitutionality does not apply retroactively and its removal is, therefore, effective as from the day after its publication in the Official Gazette (that is, February 11 2015).

Despite Italian law allowing for decisions of the Constitutional Court to be, in principle, retroactive, the Court in this case expressly limited its verdict to the future, to avoid a potentially massive adverse effect on the Italian public accounts.

This should mean that there is no room to claim for the refund of the sums paid in the past.

It is, however, unclear whether the decision affects 2014 considering that calendar year taxpayers have still (i) to pay the balance of the corporate income tax (in June 2015); and (ii) to file the 2014 tax return (in September 2015). It is also still unclear what happens for taxpayers whose fiscal year does not coincide with the calendar one. Other issues have arisen with respect to the impact of the decision in relation to the relevant accounting treatment of the deferred tax assets and liabilities due to taxable temporary differences.

Clarifications by the Italian tax authority are expected.

Giuliano Foglia (foglia@virtax.it) and Giovanni d'Ayala Valva (dayala@virtax.it)

Tremonti Vitali Romagnoli Piccardi e Associati

Tel: +39 06 3218022 (Rome); +39 02 58313707 (Milan)

Website: www.virtax.it

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

While the US’s dramatic exit from the OECD’s global tax deal naturally grabbed headlines, Trump’s premeditated move shouldn’t detract from pillar two’s lofty ambitions
The ‘big four’ firm’s audit of gambling company Entain is under the spotlight; in other news, Ireland shrugs off Trump’s rejection of pillar two
Mid-market European private equity house Inflexion, which also backs law firm DWF, has agreed to acquire a minority stake in the Dutch tax advisory firm
Donald Trump’s inauguration, pillar two, APAs and TP were all up for discussion as ITR spoke to Baker McKenzie’s two newly minted US partners
In-house teams that want a balance of internal control and external expertise for pillar two should seriously consider co-sourcing models, Russell Gammon of Tax Systems argues
The OECD has vowed to continue working with the US despite the president effectively pulling the country out of the organisation’s global minimum tax deal
Norton Rose Fulbright highlights a Brazilian investment fund as a practical example of how new Dutch tax rules will require significant attention from foreign companies
Thomson Reuters now has ‘end-to-end capability’ for its tax workflow business, according to its president for tax accounting and audit professionals
Patrick O’Gara, who is rated as a ‘highly regarded practitioner’ by World Tax, had spent over 20 years at Baker McKenzie
If approved, it would become the first ‘big four’ firm to practise law in the US; in other news, Morrison Foerster hired a new global tax co-chair
Gift this article