Como Tax Commission, the levy on bets is not VAT and can be paid twice
(Jamma) The Council of State confirms the jurisdiction of the Civil Court in the appeal filed by KingBet on the penalties for late payment of cash flows from the collection of bets (i.e. the collection of winnings and fees). In the sentence, reference is made to the jurisprudence of the Council of State itself, of the United Sections of the Court of Cassation and to a 2004 ruling of the Constitutional Court, all judges who have recognized the jurisdiction of the ordinary judge. "This, since the litigation involved exclusively patrimonial profiles of the concession relationship - under the aspect of the existence of the debt (an debeatur) and its amount (quantum debeatur)", explain the judges of Palazzo Spada. In the appeal, the company had also claimed the absolute disproportion of the penalties imposed, referring to the law of 22 May 2010, n. 73 which required the granting administrations to adopt conventional adjustments in order to guarantee the effectiveness of clauses on patrimonial sanctions, "in compliance with the principles of reasonableness, proportionality and non-automaticity". A rule which, however, is not "not immediately prescriptive" - underlines the Council of State - but has a "programmatic nature". And then he adds that, before the adaptation of the agreements, the imposition of sanctions does not involve "a spending of an authoritative power", but that one remains "in the framework of the equal regime and of a claim to the disbursement of predetermined ancillary fees /predeterminable” since “the an and the quantum of the latter do not require the intermediation of a public power”.
