Italy: new law decree restricts relocation outside Italy where beneficial regimes are granted

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Italy: new law decree restricts relocation outside Italy where beneficial regimes are granted

Italy issues changes to the operation of country-by-country reporting

Law Decree 87 dated July 12 2018 (also known as the 'dignity decree' or 'decreto dignità') was approved by the Italian government in early July 2018 and finally converted into Law 96/2018 by Parliament. It entered into force on August 12 2018.

One of the main pillars of this new law – which is likely to have a major impact on multinational groups’ operating strategies – is to restrict the relocation overseas of high-value activities (including manufacturing) by legal entities operating in Italy. In fact, companies that received state support in Italy to start and run their business activities are committed to keeping their supported high-value operations in Italy for at least five years. If they do not, the state aid will be forfeited and administrative penalties levied.

As further provided in Article 5, Paragraph 1, of Law Decree 87/2018, Italian and foreign enterprises operating in Italy which received state aid subject to carrying out productive investments, will forfeit those benefits if the supported economic activity (or even part of it) is relocated outside the EU (with the exception of those countries belonging to the European Economic Area (EEA)) within five years from the conclusion of the supported initiative. In such a case, the state aid is forfeited and administrative penalties of between two and four times the subsidy amount are levied.

Moreover, and as provided by Paragraph 2 of the same article, Italian and foreign enterprises operating in Italy which received state aid subject to carrying out productive investments in a specific geographical area, lose their subsidies if the economic activity for which the state aid was provided are relocated outside the designated area (i.e. elsewhere in Italy, the EU or the EEA) within five years from the conclusion of the supported initiative or investment.

Therefore, in both cases, state aid received will have to be given back, including interest equal to that applicable at the time the subsidy was granted, plus 5%.

As anticipated, these law provisions entered into force on August 12 2018. They do not apply retroactively, and may be applied only to sales and relocations enacted after that date.

As a matter of fact, based on Article 5, Paragraph 4 of Decree 87/2018, state aid granted and supported investments that began before these new provisions entered into force (e.g. August 12 2018) are subject to the old regulations, including Article 1, Paragraph 60 of Law 147/2013.

As with the new provisions, the latter stated that Italian and foreign companies operating in Italy that had benefited from public capital grants, would forfeit this benefit and be obliged to repay the capital grants received if, within three years from the subsidy payment, those companies relocated outside the original designated area in a non-EU country, resulting in a personnel reduction of 50% or more.

Furthermore, specific provisions relating to occupation safeguards in enterprises benefiting from public aid are set forth in Article 6 of Decree 87/2018; and Article 7 relates to the forfeiture and retrieving of specific incentives such as 'hyper amortisation' in the case of the sale or relocation abroad of those assets which benefited from such preferential treatment.

Gian Luca Nieddu (gianluca.nieddu@hager-partners.it) and Barbara Scampuddu (barbara.scampuddu@hager-partners.it)

Hager&Partners, Tel: +39 02 7780711

Website: www.hager-partners.it    

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Public country-by-country reporting is exposing multinational tax data to investors, journalists and competitors, creating fresh risks for businesses
Pillar two compliance is creating unprecedented data demands for multinational tax departments, making closer collaboration with FP&A teams essential for accurate reporting and audit readiness
Among the arrivals is Andrew Howell, who leaves scandal-hit PwC Australia after representing PepsiCo in a high-profile TP dispute
ITR's podcast examines whether the big four have overarching cultural issues and assesses the competitive threat of technology-backed transfer pricing firms
The UK advisory firm has seen its global revenues expand by £27.2m following its listing and acquisition of Baker Tilly South-East Europe
Tax-trained John Sams, previously the firm’s CFO and COO, was appointed after a rigorous process, KPMG said
From Mauritius substance rules to Kenyan SEP tax and South African anti-avoidance measures, businesses must navigate growing scrutiny of cross-border IP structures in Africa
ITR spoke to multinationals, advisers and software providers about a June 30 deadline defined by faulty portals, high compliance costs and hard lessons
After years of onerous pillar two prep, businesses will be galled in seeing tax revenues outweighed by compliance costs
Tax advisers should revisit India secondment arrangements after the EY US ruling strengthened the Centrica precedent and raised fresh withholding concerns
Gift this article