ADM cancels two tax assessments over illegal gambling devices in Calabria
Regulation2 min read
In brief
- ADM cancelled two tax assessments over alleged irregular gaming machines at a business in Isola di Capo Rizzuto.
- The cancellation rests on failure to apply prior-hearing rules after defence submissions went unanswered.
- One 2021 assessment sought €176,040 in tax, about €31,967 in interest and a €251,737 fine.
- The measure is procedural and not a ruling on the merits.
Italy's Customs and Monopolies Agency (ADM) has cancelled two tax assessment notices concerning the alleged presence of irregular gaming machines at a business in Isola di Capo Rizzuto, in the province of Crotone. The cancellation rests on the failure to apply the prior-hearing provisions of Article 6-bis of the Taxpayer Rights Statute.
The case originated in two checks carried out by the Crotone police headquarters on 8 and 10 February 2022, which identified three devices called totem. The devices were connected to the electricity grid and the internet but not to the state gaming collection network. According to the records, the devices gave access to gaming platforms offered by parties without a concession or authorisation, and also provided free browsing services.
ADM had issued two notices relating to the single gaming tax, accompanied by monetary and ancillary administrative penalties. One of the notices, for tax year 2021, provided for recovery of €176,040 in single tax, about €31,967 in interest and a €251,737 fine. A six-month closure of the business had also been ordered.
The recipients of the assessments had filed defence submissions within the deadlines, sending them by certified email to the competent ADM office on 9 December 2025. In the notices later served, the administration had stated that no observations on the draft act had been submitted, without accounting for the submissions filed or the reasons for any rejection. The matter was brought before the first-instance Tax Court of Justice in Catanzaro, in an appeal that challenged, among other points, the breach of the pre-assessment hearing, the lack of reasoning and the quantification of the tax claim.
During the proceedings, ADM itself acknowledged the procedural irregularity. In the cancellation order, the office recorded that the submissions had been logged by the administration on 11 December 2025 but had received no reply, as Article 6-bis of Law No 212/2000 requires. The measure operates on a procedural level and is not in itself a ruling on the merits regarding the classification of the machines or the alleged violations.