The judgment by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Italgomme Pneumatici and Others v Italy calls for a thorough revision of Italian legislation and administrative practice in the field of tax audits.
The ruling, delivered on February 6 2025 and published on May 6 2025, concerned 13 applications submitted by one Italian individual and 12 Italian legal entities against Italy. The applicants alleged violations of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention), which protects the right to respect for private and family life, home, and correspondence.
The complaints focused on the Italian tax authorities’ and Italian Tax Police’s practice of accessing, inspecting, and seizing business documents during tax audits, based on authorisations issued by local tax offices or Italian Tax Police commanders in accordance with Italian law.
The relevant legislation – including presidential decrees No. 600/1973 and No. 633/1972, and Law No. 4/1929 – permits access to business and professional premises with minimal procedural safeguards. Under the Italian Constitution, judicial authorisation is only required if the premises also serve as a home. Italian case law has confirmed that tax audit authorisations need not be reasoned or subject to judicial review.
The applicants argued that these measures breached their rights because the law granted excessively broad discretion to tax authorities, lacked adequate safeguards, and provided neither ex ante nor effective ex post judicial review.
The ECHR found that:
The domestic legal framework gave tax authorities virtually unlimited discretion;
Authorisations lacked specific reasoning;
Legal safeguards were insufficient;
Effective judicial review was unavailable or limited; and
The measures were not “in accordance with the law” as required by the Convention.
The court concluded there had been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention and identified a systemic problem. Acting under Article 46, it required Italy to amend its laws and administrative practices to:
Clearly define the circumstances and conditions under which tax authorities may access business and professional premises;
Establish safeguards to prevent indiscriminate access; and
Ensure effective judicial review of contested measures before the audit is finalised.
The effect of the judgment
The decision marks a turning point in Italian tax law. It confirms that tax inspections are subject to the protection of professional premises and business confidentiality, sets a new ‘quality of law’ standard for inspection powers, and demands the modernisation of an outdated regulatory framework to meet the Convention’s requirements.
The Italian tax reform
The Italian tax reform launched in 2023 – which is still in progress – addresses some of the court’s concerns by shifting from an authoritative to a dialogic approach, strengthening procedural guarantees, and increasing administrative accountability.
Key innovations include a mandatory pre-audit adversarial procedure, under penalty of annulment, and an obligation to provide a detailed statement of reasons. This aims to enhance taxpayer participation, transparency, and protection against arbitrariness.
The reform also introduces new rules for administrative self-defence, appealable in cases of silence-rejection, and establishes a national Taxpayer Guarantor with binding powers – offering immediate recourse for taxpayers.
A cultural shift underpins these changes, with an emphasis on progressive tax controls, invitations to cross-examination, and cooperative compliance, reducing the need for intrusive inspections.
However, despite these improvements, the reform does not fully incorporate the minimum guarantees required by the ECHR. Achieving full compliance would require:
Clear statutory rules on the conditions, limits, and prerequisites for access and document seizure;
Prior judicial authorisation or immediate judicial validation; and
An expedited remedy for abuses, such as an accelerated appeal to the tax courts or the Taxpayer Guarantor.
Recent legislative changes
Law No. 108/2025 has amended the Taxpayer’s Statute to require that authorisations and access reports expressly and adequately state the circumstances and conditions justifying the inspection. This represents a significant step forward from the previously broad discretion, obliging tax authorities to provide reasoned justifications that enable taxpayers to understand the audit’s purpose and to mount an informed defence.
The law specifies that while specific suspicions of tax evasion are not mandatory, the authority must identify factual triggers – such as inconsistent data, qualified reports, or anomalous behaviour – and if suspicions exist, state them explicitly.
Although welcome, the legislative intervention does not appear to be conclusive. While it is true that taxpayers had virtually no rights during tax inspections prior to the amendment, merely requiring a justification for the decision to carry out the inspection may prove to be an insufficient safeguard. It would certainly have been preferable to extend to all inspections the guarantees currently applicable to those conducted in premises used as a dwelling or for mixed residential and professional purposes, which require prior public prosecutor authorisation based on serious grounds of tax violation.
Final thoughts on the amendment
The recent amendment is commendable, but it remains insufficient to address all the ECHR’s concerns. Italy still lacks effective ex post judicial review and detailed administrative guidelines defining the precise circumstances for access.
The legislative framework would have been stronger had it included clear statutory prerequisites, prior or immediate judicial oversight, and a swift, specific remedy against abuses. Without such measures, the balance between tax enforcement and the protection of fundamental rights remains fragile.
