We report an interesting and useful question (which appeared in “Il Sole 24 Ore L’Esperto risponde N.45” del 13/11/2023), regarding the management of costs for goods purchased through the tax breaks of Industry 4.0
Request. An Ltd has made a purchase of 4.0 goods, with reservation by 12/31/2022, for which it will benefit from the 40% tax credit. In 2023 the asset was delivered and functional expenses were incurred for its installation. Such incidental expenses will be capitalized in addition to the cost of the asset. Will the tax credit generated by these additional expenses be 40% (because they are related to the asset) or 20% as they are expenses incurred in 2023?
Answer. The question suggests that the advance payment made did not also take into consideration the amount of the ancillary installation costs, with the consequence that the value of the advance (at least 20% of the value of the property) cannot be considered sufficient to guarantee the application of the higher rate of 40% to the total investment (cost of the “good” plus ancillary charges).
This case was addressed by the Revenue Agency in the responses to Telefisco 2029, albeit without a specific reference to the hypothesis of additional charges. On that occasion, the Agency had declared that <<in cases in which the advance payment should prove to be ex-poste lower than the minimum limit established by the law… as a consequence, for example, of a subsequent upward revision of the cost originally agreed on 31 /12/2018, the investor does not lose the possibility of accessing the time extension of 12/31/2019>>, i.e. the possibility of taking advantage of the booking mechanism.
The Agency had therefore argued that the value of the investment can benefit from the rates of the year “X” (2022 in the case in question), while the amounts that exceed this value will be subject to the rate of the year “X+ 1” (2023 in this case). The Ltd in question will be able to apply the 40% rate to the cost of the asset and the 20% rate to the additional costs incurred in 2023, provided that the case described in the question refers to a down payment which proved to be insufficient ex poste as mentioned in the introduction.
However, if the capacity of the deposit also includes these additional charges, you will be able to take advantage of the higher rate of 40% for both (goods + additional charges).
