The situation regarding tax credits blocked in the drawers of construction companies in Calabria is particularly critical. The investigation conducted by this newspaper over the last two days has served to confirm the existence of a parallel “market” that revolves around companies operating in the sector. The concern is not only among entrepreneurs and workers, but also among the top management of Ance Calabria. «The context is problematic – he reasons Roberto Rugnapresident of the building contractors association – not so much and not only for the block imposed on the Superbonus measure but because the government did not intend to regulate the transitional phase between the work in progress and the stop to the measure. All this has led to the financial block of the transfer of credits on all the work in progress, causing a strong liquidity crisis and failure of companies to repay investments. Over 3 and a half billion euros in investments generated in Calabria for interventions on approximately 16 thousand buildings, of which 93.8% of works completed which have constituted a strong development driver for the entire construction sector in our region. Since almost all of the interventions have been completed, it is clear that the block on the transfer of credit has caused a truly delicate situation of lack of liquidity within the business system. We are talking, in Calabria – according to an estimate made among our companies – of over 200 million euros blocked in tax drawers”.
The “parallel” market
In such a complex framework, we have recently witnessed the phenomenon of splintered financial companies that create an investment fund connected to bonds issued on the nominal value of the purchased credits. “The problem – reflects Rugna – is not so much represented by investment funds and bonds or rather by securitizations. The main point is represented by the solidity and seriousness of the subjects that propose the operation and by the clarity and transparency of the investment funds that are activated. This as a general premise. Once this first critical point has been overcome, the problems that arise in the use of these financial forms are the costs that the company must face for the transfer and the multi-year nature of the credits involved. In addition to the costs of the initial due diligence – which are not indifferent – there is the cost of the actual transfer which is often more than 30% of the nominal value of the transferred credits. In the institutional version – as long as it worked – these costs were between 12 and 14%. Furthermore, as I was saying, very often credits are purchased annually and therefore the overall credit of the company is divided. This last thing, by not making the renewal for subsequent years certain, prevents companies from being able to use other more institutional financial channels, such as banks, which rarely purchase credits already divided».