With the ordinance no. 29505/2021, the Court of Cassation affirmed the following principle: in the event that the electricity consumption recorded in the three-year period is low, the municipal administration may disregard the facilitation provided for by art. 8 of Legislative Decree 504/1992 for the main residence.
As we know, by main residence we mean the real estate unit in which the person lives and habitually resides.
The article in question recognizes a deduction of 50% for buildings declared uninhabitable or uninhabitable and in fact not used, albeit limited to the period of the year during which these conditions exist.
Why did the Supreme Court decide to do so?
This explains the mystery: the low consumption of electricity recorded over a suitable period of time (three years) would constitute a valid source of evidence suitable for denying the presumption of habitual residence in the place of residence.
Translating from the legalese into a human language: if you consume little, isn't it that maybe you don't live in that house? And if you don't live there, you are not entitled to first home benefits, of course. All clear?
Furthermore, the exemption does not apply if the property is registered as an office or study. The proof of low consumption, however, represents a simple and not an absolute presumption: this means that the taxpayer may well offer proof to the contrary.
Fiat lux!
