February 28, 2025
Personnel administration
Mileage reimbursement for professional associates in a professional association is deductible
Cass., Labor Section

The Italian Revenue Agency challenged the full deduction of mileage reimbursements paid by a law firm to its associates. Although the expense reports were supported by the performance of professional assignments, the Revenue Agency argued that mileage reimbursements were only partially deductible, limited to 40% (now reduced to 20%), under Article 164 of the Italian Income Tax Code (T.U.I.R.), which concerns the deductibility of expenses for vehicles.

The Supreme Court ruled that mileage reimbursements to associates fall under the general deductibility criteria provided by Article 54 of the T.U.I.R., rather than the provisions of Article 164. Specifically, the Court clarified that if the transport is carried out using a vehicle owned by the professional associate, the expense is fully deductible, provided it is strictly related to the professional activity. The partial deductibility provided by Article 164 applies only to expenses related to vehicles owned by the professional association itself.

February 10, 2025
Dismissal for just cause
The employee’s duty of loyalty must also be respected outside of working hours
Cass., Labor Section

A part-time employee of Rete Ferroviaria Italiana (RFI) was dismissed for just cause for breaching his duty of loyalty towards the employer. Specifically, the company accused the employee of engaging in unauthorized entrepreneurial activities in a sector that could potentially conflict with the company’s business. The employee held operational and managerial roles in several companies without informing his employer, thereby violating company regulations and the internal code of ethics.

The Supreme Court reaffirmed that the duty of loyalty is not limited to the prohibition of competition, but also requires the employee to refrain from any conduct that could harm the company’s interests or compromise the fiduciary relationship. In this case, the employee’s failure to disclose his external business activities irreparably undermined mutual trust, justifying his dismissal for just cause. The Court emphasized that employers have the right to expect loyal and transparent behavior from their employees, even outside working hours.

January 30, 2025
Social security and contributions
INPS: New minimum and maximum contribution thresholds set for 2025
INPS

As usual, INPS has published the updated minimum and maximum contribution thresholds, along with additional values for calculating mandatory contributions.

The adjustment applied to the 2024 thresholds amounts to 0.8%.

The new thresholds apply starting from January 1, 2025, and must be adjusted to the new daily minimum wage of €57.32 (9.5% of the monthly minimum pension amount from the Employees’ Pension Fund, effective January 1, 2025, set at €603.40 per month), if lower than this amount.

The conventional minimum wage for general purposes is set at €31.85.

The minimum contribution threshold for part-time employment contracts is set at €8.60 for a 40-hour workweek (generally applicable to workers registered under private sector schemes) or €7.96 for a 36-hour workweek, for workers enrolled in public sector schemes.

Finally, employers who were unable to apply the updated thresholds for January 2025 contributions (due to the late publication of Circular 26/2025) will be able to rectify these contributions by April 16, 2025.

January 25, 2025
Working Hours, leave, and permits
Transport companies’ responsibility for correct use of tachographs
Cass., Labor Section

A driver employed by a transport company was fined by the Highway Police for driving without inserting the driver card into the digital tachograph of a bus, in violation of Article 179 of the Highway Code. The transport company appealed the fine, claiming that the employee was unable to insert the card due to a technical malfunction of the device and that a manual log had been compiled as a substitute.

However, the Supreme Court rejected the company’s appeal. The judges reiterated that, in cases involving violations related to the use of tachographs, the transport company is responsible not only for the infractions committed by its drivers but also for ensuring the proper functioning of the monitoring devices.

The Court emphasized that in the event of a malfunction, it is not sufficient to show that the defect was accidental; the company must prove that it exercised ordinary diligence in inspecting the vehicle and ensuring the correct functioning of the tachograph. In this case, the company failed to provide adequate evidence of such diligence, and the fine was upheld.

February 25, 2025
Employee monitoring
Dismissal for falsely reporting work attendance is legitimate
Cass., Labor Section

A gas distribution worker was dismissed for falsely certifying his attendance and recording fake times for interventions at customer sites. The employee challenged the dismissal, claiming that the company conducted covert surveillance using a private investigation agency and by monitoring data from the company-issued tablet, which was connected to the corporate portal containing service records.

The Supreme Court rejected this argument, ruling that the false data entered into the portal constituted fraudulent conduct by the employee, not improper monitoring by the employer.

Furthermore, the Court deemed the investigation conducted by the private agency lawful, as it was aimed at uncovering unlawful behavior causing harm to the company. These investigations were therefore considered legitimate and not in violation of the law.

As a result, the Supreme Court upheld the legitimacy of the employee’s dismissal.

February 4, 2025
Social safety nets
Advance NASPI payments: partial repayment if new employment ends due to force majeure
INPS

INPS has issued instructions regarding the partial recovery of advanced NASPI unemployment benefits.

If a force majeure event makes it impossible for the worker to continue the self-employment or business activity started with the NASPI lump-sum payment, the worker will only be required to repay a portion of the benefit, proportional to the actual duration of the employment relationship established during the theoretical NASPI entitlement period.

Before demanding full repayment of the benefit, INPS must verify whether unforeseeable and unavoidable events outside the worker’s control made it impossible to continue the activity. INPS must notify the worker and give them 30 days to explain the reasons for the interruption.

If the worker can demonstrate the impossibility of continuing the self-employed or business activity, the repayment obligation will be limited accordingly.

February 4, 2025
Maternity and paternity leave
Business activity during parental leave is unlawful
Cass., Labor Section

An employee was found to be running an undisclosed business during parental leave. The employer hired a private investigator, who posed as a customer to confirm the employee’s ongoing business activity.

The Supreme Court upheld the employee’s dismissal.

The Court found that the business activity was neither occasional nor sporadic, and it conflicted with the purpose of paid parental leave — which is to allow the parent to devote time and energy, including their physical presence, to meeting the child’s emotional needs.

This conduct was deemed an abuse of the right to parental leave, thereby justifying the employee’s dismissal.