Italy’s Court of Cassation issued an order on 10 December 2025 addressing the relationship between gambling-related tax assessments and income taxation. It clarified limits and conditions for using tax presumptions when betting collection activity is involved; the source provides no further details of the ruling.
The ruling concerns how tax authorities may use presumptions when assessing betting-related income.
The day’s most important stories, free. One email a day.
Italy’s Court of Cassation accepted an appeal by the Customs and Monopolies Agency (ADM) in a dispute over betting tax for 2018 involving a data transmission centre and a foreign bookmaker. The court ruled that the challenge to the notice procedure had not been raised in time at first instance and returned the case to the Campania tax court of second instance for reconsideration.
Italy’s Court of Cassation ruled in an order deposited on 13 April 2026 that betting operators outside the national totalisator may use the ordinary tax method based on actual margins if they provide accounting evidence. The order rejected the parties’ appeal because they had not supplied that documentation; the court said adequate records of stakes, winnings and costs can rebut the assumed tax calculation.
Italy’s Court of Cassation rejected the Customs and Monopolies Agency’s appeal in a dispute over betting tax for 2015. The court upheld a more favourable calculation for the taxpayer, ruling that a stricter method for later years could not apply retroactively to that tax period.
Italy’s Court of Cassation rejected a company’s appeal on 5 March 2026, upholding a tax assessment by the Customs and Monopolies Agency (ADM) over a betting point linked to an unauthorised foreign bookmaker. The court said the tax claim relied on a separate legal basis from the provision struck down by the Constitutional Court in 2025, and found the equipment had been dedicated to collecting bets.
Lawyer Marco Ripamonti said Italy’s Constitutional Court ruling 104/2025 has also been applied in tax and criminal proceedings, as well as challenges to administrative penalties. The ruling found unconstitutional a provision of the Balduzzi Decree that prohibited making electronic tools available for gambling, he said.