Italy: Robin Hood Tax on energy companies declared illegitimate

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: 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 & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

New research, which suggests LLMs can silently corrupt complex documents, should alert tax and legal teams relying on AI to handle iterative drafting and compliance workflows
Maintaining increased funding for HMRC is a ‘high possibility’ if he becomes PM, ITR has also heard
Awards
ITR is delighted to reveal all the shortlisted nominees for the 2026 Europe Tax Awards
The firm has hired a team of private client lawyers from Withers to launch in New York and Connecticut, though ITR analysis suggests it faces stiff competition
The ability of tax authorities to receive and analyse data is becoming ‘quite advanced’, warns Stuart Lang, head of EY’s compliance co-sourcing solution
The Court of Appeal ruling clarifies that treaty benefits are not abusive where transactions are commercially driven, providing greater certainty on “main purpose” anti-avoidance tests
Despite the Netherlands featuring an unusual concentration of World Tax-ranked technology-led providers, sources believe there’s a long way to go to challenge the established players
Ethics seems to be playing a subservient role to an entitlement culture borne out of a pervasive ‘revenue at all costs’ mentality at the big four
Historical World Tax data suggests the ‘largest law firm merger in history’ may not pose a serious threat to the world's leading tax practices
The repeal of Libya’s statute of limitations and tougher enforcement leave taxpayers navigating a high-stakes choice between conciliation and litigation
Gift this article