easily found on the Internet This article serves as a reminder to institutions that continue to pretend nothing has happened, that TARSU has been abolished. Hopefully we will try to produce the same item in dialect Maddalonese, just to allow the great luminaries voted to "look" to represent Maddalonese all, in an elementary way to understand even for those minds clouded by the bulkiness and high brain activity. That said, for the most extensive and rapid spread of the citizen Maddalonese.
Tuesday 25 maggio 2010 di Maurizio VillaniL’articolo 23 della Costituzione stabilisce una riserva assoluta di legge in materia tributaria; non è più possibile per i Comuni richiedere il pagamento della Tarsu, in quanto non esiste più alcuna norma di fonte primaria che legittimi l’applicazione della relativa legge (D.Lgs. 507 del 15 novembre 1993). E pertanto gli eventuali regolamenti emanati dai Comuni e applicativi della Tarsu saranno da considerarsi, inevitabilmente, illegittimi. L’art. 49 del D.Lgs. 22 del 5 febbraio 1997, al primo comma, stabilisce che: “La tassa per lo smaltimento dei rifiuti di cui alla sezione II del Capo XVIII del titolo III del testo unico della finanza locale, approvato con regio decreto 14 settembre 1931, n. 1175, come sostituito dall’articolo 21 del Decreto del Presidente della Repubblica 10 settembre 1982, n. 915, ed al capo III del decreto legislativo 15 novembre 1993, n. 507 è soppressa a decorrere dai termini previsti dal regime transitorio, disciplinato dal regolamento di cui al comma 5, entro i quali i Comuni devono provvedere alla integrale copertura dei costi del servizio di gestione dei rifiuti urbani attraverso la tariffa di cui al comma 2”. Pertanto, è chiara la norma nello stabilire la decorrenza dell’abrogazione del D.Lgs. 507 del 15 novembre 1993, facendola coincidere con la decadenza del regime transitorio da disciplinarsi nel regolamento di attuazione. E, dunque, è indiscutibile che la sopravvivenza della Tarsu dipenda, by law, solely and exclusively by the survival of a transitional regime that specifically the extension (LEX QUOD VOLUIT DIXIT). The DPR 158, April 27, 1999 is the implementing regulation of the Legislative Decree no. 22/1997 (called Ronchi Decree) just mentioned. Art. 11, the same rules governing the transition, in accordance with the dictates of the rule, referred to in paragraph 5 of Article. 49 D. Lgs. 22/1997. This transitional arrangement stipulated that local authorities were required to achieve full recovery of costs of solid waste management through the tariff by the end of the transition, the duration of which was set up in, initially, in three years. The transition from the Tarsu Tia Ronchi Decree was dunque, obbligato e doveva essere compiuto entro il termine massimo fissato dal regolamento stesso. Il termine prestabilito dal legislatore nell’art. 11 è stato oggetto di successive proroghe da parte del legislatore fino ad arrivare a quella da “sei anni” a “sette anni” sancita dall’art. 1, comma 134, della L. n. 266, 23 dicembre 2005 (legge Finanziaria 2006). Nel 2006, precisamente il 29 aprile, entrava in vigore il D.Lgs. n. 152 del 03 aprile 2006, c.d. Codice dell’ambiente. All’articolo 264 dello stesso decreto appena citato, rubricato “abrogazione di norme”, il primo comma stabilisce che: “ a decorrere dalla data di entrata in vigore della parte quarta del presente decreto remain or are hereby excluded to the provisions of this order provides further validity: i) Legislative Decree 5 February 1997, No 22 (cd Ronchi Decree). To ensure that there is no solution of continuity in the transition from pre-existing legislation that provided by Part Four of this Ordinance, implementing provisions of the Decree of 5 February 1997 No 22 continue to apply until the entry into force of the relevant implementing measures provided for in Part IV of this decree. "For the purposes of the Environment Code, art. 238, paragraph 6, of the same Decree. 152/2006 provides for the establishment of an implementing regulation. This Regulation, however, has not yet been issued. Therefore, waiting for the implementing rule just mentioned, remained, and remains firm, expressed the need for an extension of the transitional arrangements. In fact, the law L. No 296 of December 27, 2006 (2007 Budget), is impliedly repealed the transitional arrangements as provided for in Article 11 of Presidential Decree 158/1999. Having been repealed Decree. 22/1997 art. 264 of Legislative Decree no. 152/2006, is in fact lack the foundation of the rule just quoted ex article 11, which governs a transition period to allow local authorities and the gradual adjustment to cover the operating costs of TIA. In fact, art. 1, paragraph 184, Lett. a) of the Finance Act 2007 stated that "the levy system for the services of collection and disposal of wastes adopted in each municipality for the year 2006 remains unchanged for the years 2007 and 2008." As can be seen, therefore, the letter of the rule, the new phase is no longer aimed at the gradual application of the Ronchi Decree (Legislative Decree no. 22/1997), now repealed by the Environmental Code, but on the contrary, has the order to avoid any disruption in the collection of the waste tax, pending issued the regulations implementing Decree. 152/2006. Subsequently, Decree Law No. 208, December 30, 2008, converted amended by Law No 13 of February 27, 2009, art. 5, paragraph 1, stated that "art. 1, paragraph 184 of Law No. 27/12/2006 296, are amended as follows: a) the letter a), the words "and for the year 2008 'is replaced by the following:" and for the years 2008 and 2009 "." In that case, if there had been no intervention by the legislature, would be created, as has happened dall'01 / 01/2010, the lack of a state law that legitimizes, by virtue of legal reservation under 'Art. 23 of the Constitution, the application is that of Tia Tarsu of the Ronchi Decree, having been repealed Decree. 22/1997 which established and governs Tia, and consequently the art. 49 of the same Decree. 22/1997, which provided for the establishment of a transitional extension of Tarsu. Can not, however, a presidential decree dictates a discipline compensating for the lack of an express legal. The function to avoid any legal vacuum was carried out at that moment, art. 264 of Legislative Decree no. 152 dated 03/04/2006 and L. No 296 of 27.12.2006 (as amended). Article. 264 of Legislative Decree no. 152 of 03/04/2006 establishes, in fact, that "the date of entry into force of Part IV of this Decree are or are hereby excluded to the provisions of this Decree provides further validity: i) Legislative Decree 5 February 1997, No 22 (cd Ronchi Decree). To ensure that there is no solution of continuity in the transition from pre-existing legislation that provided by Part Four of this Ordinance, implementing provisions of the Decree of 5 February 1997 No 22 continue to apply until the entry into force of the relevant implementing measures provided for in Part IV of this decree. "Therefore, it is easy to conclude that, given the express repeal before the Legislative Decree no. 507/1993 and then to D. Decree Law 22/1997, the law governing the transitional arrangements contained in the Law 296/2006, is the only legitimate source of law that the application of both law otherwise applicable. So, his total lack no doubt implies the illegality of the tax levy on the basis of either law, since repealed. In fact, for this reason, the Decree Law No. 208, 30 December 2008, ratified with amendments by Law No 13 of 27 February 2009, they extended it for the year 2009, providing for the change in art. 1, paragraph 184, Lett. a) the words "and for the year 2008" with the following: "and for the years 2008 and 2009". " One can not say the same, on the contrary, with respect to the DL 194, 30 December 2009 converted con modificazioni, dalla L. 25 del 26 febbraio 2010. Pertanto, manca del tutto una modifica espressa del termine di cui all’art. 1, comma 184, lett. a) della L. n. 296 del 27 dicembre 2006, come al contrario vi era nella precedente norma di proroga, che prevedeva, come già detto, la modifica nell’art. 1, comma 184, lett. a), delle parole: «e per l’anno 2008» con: «e per gli anni 2008 e 2009»”. Pertanto, il regime transitorio, e quindi la lettera a) del comma 184 dell’art. 1 della L. 296/2006, è inevitabilmente decaduto. Infatti, il legislatore ha disposto espressamente che si applichino le discipline regolamentari vigenti, da intendersi, ovviamente, con “tutte quelle force at the time of application. " In this case, the date dell'01 / 01/2010, failing and not being able to understand in greater detail with "force on the entry into force of article", that is, April 29, 2006, as may well happen that, as in this case, the rules in force at the time of entry into force of the item are different from those prevailing at the time when the rule should be applied can not, indeed, the Legislative Decree no. 152/2006 revive laws now repealed. In conclusion, today TARSU no longer exists because it lacks an express provision for extension, unless the legislature did not act with a specific law. Lecce, 21/05/2010 Mr. Maurizio Villani
