From superbonus 110% to ordinary sismabous: is it always possible? It is one of the many questions that come to the editorial office, never so interesting in view of the deadline of June 30, 2022, by which 30% of the overall work progress (SAL) must be reached.
Sismabonus 110%: how and when
In the event that a seismic risk reduction project, which does not include demolition and reconstruction, wishes to access the 110% tax deductions (superbonus) provided for in art. 119, paragraph 4 of the Law Decree n. 34/2020 (Relaunch Decree), it is necessary to present the well-known CILA-Superbonus and at the same time, by the start of the construction site, the improvement project and the technical certification provided for this type of intervention.
To this need is added the upcoming expiry of the 110% superbonus foreseen for single-family buildings. Notwithstanding the deadline of 30 June 2022, art. 119, paragraph 8-bis of the Relaunch Decree provides for various extensions based on the type of beneficiary. For single-family homes, the possibility of deducting expenses incurred by 31 December 2022 as a deduction to 110% is up to the condition that at 30 June 2022 works have been carried out for at least 30% of the total intervention
Condition that requires reflections on the possibility of falling back on the ordinary seismabonus which, after Law no. 234/2021 (Budget Law 2022) has a deadline set at 31 December 2024. But, if the intervention was started by calibrating it on the 110% superbonus, is it always possible to fall back on ordinary bonuses? I talked about it with Eng. Cristian Angeli, expert seismabonus professional, to whom I asked some questions.
Requirements for access to the sismabonus 110%
D. Ing. Angeli explain to us the technical approach for a seismic risk reduction project that wants to access the 110% super bonus.
R. Let’s try to imagine for a moment that the Superbonus does not exist and that the normal home discounts do not exist either.
What would we do if we had to renovate? For example, if we had to renovate the roof, replacing the beams and reinforcing the foundations …
First we would check the regularity of the property, then we would make an inspection, of the measures, we would talk to the customer asking him what his real needs are and then, applying the current technical standards, we would go to size the structure. By doing so, we would guarantee the reduction of seismic risk, because the NTCs foresee it for any structural intervention concerning existing buildings, regardless of whether it is local, improvement or seismic adaptation.
We would be very careful in choosing the materials, the sections of the beams and the construction technologies, to safeguard the pockets of those who pay. We would never dream of providing more works than those strictly essential, nor would our client, a good father of a family, dream of asking us for them.
In addition, the relationship with the company would be carefully contracted and a fair discount on prices would be requested.
During the work we would carry out the normal checks of regular execution and we would draw up the site accounts, liquidating the amounts relating to the works actually carried out at a certain date, no more and no less.
I think that this very banal picture of everyday life represents better than anything else the technical approach that must be taken in a project that must access 110%.
Woe to get carried away, woe to think that pants pay so much, because we have seen in recent months that there can be many unforeseen events.
That then there is some more fulfillment to be done is very true, but the technical substance is this.
The requirements for access to the ordinary sismabonus
D. What if we wanted to access the ordinary seismabonus instead?
R. First of all it must be said that the ordinary Sismabonus does not represent a free choice option. The Monitoring Commission on Sismabonus, with opinion prot. n. 5047/2020, explained that “With the issue of the” Super sismabonus “, a change was introduced to the” Sismabonus “by replacing the deductible percentages provided therein with a single percentage equal to 110%”. It means that, in cases where there are the conditions – objective and subjective – to access 110%, the ordinary Sismabonus is off limits.
He can return to the game only if he leaves the enclosure marked by art. 119, for example if time limits are exceeded, which is not difficult. A delay in a supply or a design hitch is enough and here we lose precious time, which can send even the best time schedule set on 30/06 to pieces.
Or you may encounter difficulties in reaching 30% of the total amount. Here too it takes little. An unforeseen event in progress, or changed design needs, or price updates, can easily cause the final (overall) cost of the works to rise, making the illusion of having reached the 30% target on 30 June vanish ex post.
Therefore, barring extensions or regulatory changes, for some owners of single-family buildings, one of the fundamental requirements for the use of 110% could be lacking, with consequent exclusion ex law from the maxi facilitation.
But there is not only June 30 in the calendar. The same problem will arise later. Today little is said about the deadline of 12/31/2022, perhaps because it is further away, but this too will not be long in coming. Those who have not completed the payments by that date, for example due to failure to reach the next SAL, multiple of the first 30%, will be excluded from the Superbonus for all the unpaid part.
In both cases (for the total expenditure if the target of 30% is missing as of June 30th, or for the unpaid part if it goes beyond December 31st), it will be necessary to settle for the ordinary deductions reserved for anti-seismic works which, for single-family homes are equal to 70 or 80% of the expenditure.
From Sismabonus 110% to ordinary sismabonus
D. So, from a technical point of view, is it possible to switch from a 110% seismabonus project to one that accesses the ordinary bonus?
R. In principle, yes, it is possible. The forms are the same, the declarations are valid for both cases, and also the basic rule is obviously the same, i.e. the Ministerial Decree 58/2017. But there is a but.
The DL n. 34/2020, by virtue of the provisions of paragraph 4 of art. 119, as converted with Law 77/2020, you will all remember, has frozen, provisionally and in an emergency, some cornerstones of the ordinary Sismabonus. Eg:
- it has eliminated the obligation of the seismic class jump. Today it is allowed to certify the use of the Super Sismabonus with “no class leap” and in this case, as the Monitoring Commission on Sismabonus explained in its opinion n.3 / 2021, “It is not necessary to certify either the“ ex ante ”or the“ ex post ”risk class;
- made it possible to bypass the seismic verification of the pre-existing building in all cases in which its demolition is foreseen. Here too the Monitoring Commission put it in black and white in the same opinion 3/2021 “In the case of demolition and reconstruction of entire buildings or their portions, for the new reconstructed organism … the reduction of two risk classes is considered achieved and it will not be necessary to fill in the section of the forms relating to the assignment of the risk class” ex ante “.
Therefore, the transition from a 110% Sismabonus project to an ordinary Sismabonus project, if for some reason the limits of the Superbonus are exceeded (30 June and 31 December), is not always taken for granted. Problems could be encountered in the actual design setting, because the sworn intervention for the Superbonus may not be sufficiently incisive to reach the seismic class leap that is indispensable for the ordinary Sismabonus.
Or the data relating to the classification of the building in the ex ante state may be missing, which can be waived only for Superbonus purposes.
In these circumstances, in the absence of official clarifications, it is likely to believe that the ordinary Sismabonus is precluded, due to the lack of data required by the original version of the DM58 / 2017.
If the work hasn’t started, it’s not bad. With a little patience and, probably even with a few more burdens, the re-submission of the project could be enough, canceling the previous one and reconnecting new declarations relating to numerically more appreciable interventions for the purpose of the seismic class jump.
If, on the other hand, the works have begun, a problem that is difficult to overcome could arise, especially if the starting building has already been demolished.
In this case, all that remains is to fall back on deductions for building renovation at 50%.
The Fractionation for a longer time horizon
D. Ing. Angeli, during construction is it possible to split the single building in two in order to access the deadline set for condominiums?
R. During construction it is certainly not possible, because to divide a building into several real estate units, a building practice dedicated to the specific splitting operation is required, which would overlap the building title inherent to the Superbonus. Then we must not forget that it is necessary to refer to the state of the property “before the work begins” and therefore, also for this reason, it would be completely useless to divide the building during construction.
A little more than three months after the dead line of the villas, for those wishing to venture now, my advice is to make a detailed time schedule, attaching it to a contract in which the commitments of each one should be specified for the achievement of the objectives, both the professional side and the business side. Given the stakes it is very important to be clear.
If there are uncertainties or if one of the actors, for more than understandable reasons, does not feel comfortable ensuring that they stay within the limits, it will be appropriate to immediately envisage a plan B, verifying whether the conditions exist at least to access the ordinary Sismabonus that , in the case of interventions that reduce the seismic risk of two classes, it leads to a “loss” equal to 30% of the tax relief (110-80 = 30%). Bad but not terrible.
Finally, if the conditions exist to be able to do so in compliance with the regulations and rules in force, it is certainly advisable to evaluate the possibility of splitting the property, in order to take advantage of the long expiry of the Superbonus on 31/12/2023.
We thank Eng. Cristian Angeli for his valuable contribution and we remain available for any comments.