New INPS checks are triggered to avoid tax fraudInclusion allowance (Adi), contributions which for approximately two years have replaced the income of residents who are said to be “unable to work”. This new intervention concerns ex-convicts, people who are in a state of semi-freedom and those who have been convicted of a crime, but are allowed alternative courses of action to prison (such as recovery communities). The rules governing ADI, in fact, provide that those in “disadvantaged conditions” can receive it (provided they also meet economic requirements such as a low ISEE threshold), including prisoners who are not in correctional institutions or those who can leave them for part of the day for certain reasons and may also perform public utility work.
The mechanism
Through a public message last Wednesday, the Social Security Institute set out to expand existing IT services, namely validating the certification required for access to ADI, which now also involves the Office of External Criminal Enforcement (UEPE). In practice, offices following alternative pathways to incarceration will be able to connect to the INPS platform and directly confirm whether a person is truly on an alternative course of action, reintegration program, or therapeutic pathway.
This step is designed to make verification of adverse conditions stated in the application more timely and secure. To date, INPS investigations have been primarily based on requests for confirmation from the government that has issued the certificate: for example the local health or social services authority where inclusion in the treatment program has been announced. The intervention just communicated expands the boundaries of control and places the INPS in direct contact with those who manage external criminal law enforcement, namely the offices that know the judicial situation and the actual implementation of the measures. This does not mean that correctional institution certification will replace other examinations, but that certification will be additional and stronger evidence of the stated conditions.
Transparency
From an administrative point of view, this procedure requires the body called to validate the certification to respond via electronic services. In case of failure to provide a response within the expected technical deadlines, operational measures are envisaged to avoid permanently blocking the procedure, but the responsibility for providing feedback lies with the competent territorial office. Therefore, those followed by Uepe must ensure that the territorial office is informed and able to use the service, while presenting all useful documentation, such as court orders or official certifications.
Therefore, the new tightening of the INPS makes the stages of assessing the conditions of correctional institutions more stringent, and at the same time makes the relationship between certificate issuing institutions and subsidizing social security institutions more transparent. For those involved in social assistance and potential beneficiaries themselves, the practical recommendation of the Social Security Institute is to maintain documentation and correctly indicate, in the Adi application, the office that handles external criminal cases. Only in this way can this new procedure perform its intended function: unmasking fraud and at the same time ensuring that those truly harmed continue to receive the support provided by law.
© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
