Judgment No. 9431/2024: The Prescription of Administrative Monetary Sanctions

The recent ruling No. 9431 of April 9, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, provides important clarifications regarding the right to collect administrative monetary sanctions. In particular, the judgment focuses on the issue of prescription, establishing that the term for exercising the right to collection is ten years, in accordance with Art. 2953 of the Civil Code. This ruling has a significant impact for taxpayers, as it clarifies the timelines within which the Financial Administration can proceed.

The Context of the Judgment

In the specific case, the appellant R. (G. R.) contested the legitimacy of a payment notice issued by the Attorney General of the State for the delay in paying taxes. The Court reaffirmed that once a judgment confirming a liquidation notice has become final, the right to collect administrative sanctions arises and, consequently, is subject to ordinary prescription.

Right to collect administrative monetary sanctions - Payment notice - Liquidation notice - Final judgment - Term for exercise - Ordinary prescription regime - Actio iudicati. The right to collect administrative monetary sanctions, arising from the delay in paying the main tax resulting from a payment notice issued after the finalization of the judgment confirming the liquidation notice, is subject to a ten-year prescription period, with direct application of Art. 2953 of the Civil Code, which generally regulates the so-called actio iudicati.

Practical Implications of the Judgment

The decision of the Court of Cassation clarifies several fundamental aspects:

  • The ten-year prescription period applies to all administrative monetary sanctions unless otherwise provided by specific laws.
  • The finalization of the judgment confirming the liquidation notice represents the starting point for the beginning of the prescription.
  • The taxpayer's knowledge of the payment notice will play a crucial role in determining the actual passage of the prescription term.

Such clarifications are essential for taxpayers, as they help them better understand their rights and obligations concerning administrative sanctions. Additionally, they provide a more transparent regulatory framework for managing disputes with the Financial Administration.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 9431 of 2024 represents an important step forward in defining the rights of taxpayers regarding administrative sanctions. The clarity concerning the ten-year prescription period, supported by Art. 2953 of the Civil Code, offers greater protection to citizens, making the relationship with the Financial Administration more transparent. It remains essential for taxpayers to be informed and aware of these rights in order to act promptly and protect their positions.

Bianucci Law Firm