At the moment, there is no super bonus, on the contrary: the measure has been extended (until September 2022) for single-family homes. For condominiums, the measure will expire by the end of 2023, but the councilor for the house and neighborhood plan in Milan, Pierfrancesco Maran, is requesting that the measure be extended specifically to allow encroachment on popular buildings.
“We continue to hope that the government will distinguish between the super-bonus for all and that for public housing: if this area were continued to be limited, an action could be taken to revolutionize the public housing that the country absolutely needs and that it is for. Milan “indispensable”, Maran said on the sidelines of the press conference on “Inventing Cities” in the Palazzo Reale on the morning of Thursday 5 May.
Superbonus: everything you need to know
Furthermore, Maran called for the creation of a kind of “preferential lane” for public housing. “I share many of the criticisms that President Draghi has made about the scope of the superbonus, both because there was no negotiation of the price and because it could not be negotiated if the limit was 2023 – he added – public housing did not necessarily. must do the work before next year’s deadline: we are even planning until 2030, but it will allow intervention in the buildings that need it most. It would be important, we have said that for some time. It could also be a way to avoid closing the 110% lever completely, but aiming it at public targets with even lower numbers “.
The problems with superbonus
The super bonus has been widely criticized by Mario Draghi, while the parties have always defended it to the sword (winning the duel in parliament). One may, however, wonder how right the Prime Minister is and how right the political forces that are in favor of the initiative are.
The premiere talked about a “triple” efficiency cost, because the bonus “removes the price negotiation”. However, information that we have not been able to verify and from which the Prime Minister has not explained the source better.
However, the latest report from the Chamber of Deputies on “energy recovery and upgrading of the building stock: an estimate of the impact of incentive measures”, published in December last year, gives us some interesting data. Meanwhile, the cost of “incentive” construction investment, as might be expected, increased in 2021 and went from an average of 30 to 51.2 billion. It is then noted that “the plants benefiting from the super-eco-bonus have undergone constant and progressive growth from the start-up phase until now, not only in total amounts but also in intervention costs”.
In particular, the average costs per intervention for single-family units and independent property units “from 84,000 euros per intervention in the submitted declarations until March 2021 to 113,000 in the two-month period August-September, to fall to 108,000 euros per intervention in the declarations submitted to October 2021”.
In April 2022, the average investment to renovate a villa with a bonus of 110% according to ENEA data was approximately 112 thousand euros and 97,575 for functionally independent buildings.
Rising commodity prices could have contributed to the increase in average costs per capita. intervention. According to Ance (National Association of Building Builders), the price of round steel for reinforced concrete has increased by +40% in the first two months of 2022, and so has the price of bitumen (data updated to March 24, 2022). To curb speculation (and fraud), it must be remembered that the government annually sets a ceiling on the cost of materials to take advantage of the bonuses, a ceiling that has recently been raised by 20% precisely to cope with the increases.
Building bonuses and equity (which is not there)
But if one omits the “fraud factor”, the aspect that should be highlighted the most is probably the fairness of the superbonus and other incentives of this type. The Chamber of Deputies’ report highlights the fact that the building bonuses (we are not talking about 110% bonus in this case, but the speech can only be similar) have not “proportionally eased the taxpayers’ economic sectors”, but have instead assumed “a tax dimension of ‘anti -progressive ‘, which increasingly facilitates high incomes, both for the number of incentives used and for the amount of work “. The data on the tax returns for 2020 (and on the use of the 50% restructuring bonus) are eloquent: if less than 10,000 euros, the average benefit is 388 euros, for those earning more than 150,000 euros, it rises to 2,524, more than six times as well.