Italy is once again turning its political attention to private gold, but the current move goes significantly further than previous measures. While the state has taxed gold sales for years, mere possession has remained exempt from reporting requirements. Now, a proposal effectively brings private gold ownership under state control and creates a new source of revenue. The planned certification functions like a form of indulgence: citizens pay 12.5 percent of the current value to have their precious metal considered “legitimate” without providing any documentation – even though possession was never illegal and no one was ever required to prove its origin. This very point is generating massive criticism, as the reform cloaks fiscal interests in the guise of transparency. (reuters: 14.11.25)
Certification as a Way to Control Private Gold Holdings
The government is introducing a mechanism to register undocumented gold through a paid certification process. The fee is 12.5 percent of the market value. This creates a way to unlock the tax implications of existing gold holdings. The previous tax rule, however, required a 26 percent tax on the entire proceeds when selling gold without documentation. Many households considered this old rule disproportionate, as the ownership itself was never problematic. Now, a system is being created in which people pay to be able to sell their own precious metal freely later.
This leads to a paradoxical situation. Until now, citizens were not required to keep any documentation, as there was never an obligation to prove the origin of their valuables. Now, the reform introduces indirect coercion: either one accepts the oppressive 26 percent tax or pays 12.5 percent for formal recognition. This increases state control without any prior legal basis.
Tradition without documents – now suddenly the basis for new levies
For generations, coins, bars, and jewelry have been privately owned in Italy. Families often transferred these valuables without receipts. This tradition now serves the state as justification for a “modernization.” But in reality, a measure is being created that deeply subjects private assets to new oversight. Politicians speak of order, but the reform primarily benefits the state’s finances.
Many owners now face a dilemma: they possess legal property, but without documentation, it is difficult to sell because the 26 percent tax erodes its value. Now the state demands money to lower this hurdle. The structure resembles a state-run system of selling indulgences, freedoms that were previously taken for granted. The new certification doesn’t stem from a genuine need, but rather from a strategic interest in generating additional revenue.
New Revenue Stream Instead of Genuine Reform
Internal estimates suggest billions of dollars would be spent if only a small portion of private gold holdings were certified. This clearly demonstrates that the financial aspect is paramount. The reform creates a convenient source of income without the government explicitly stating it. A citizen who has legally held precious metals for decades suddenly pays for recognition that should be a given.
The new tax code shifts responsibility and risk entirely onto private households. There is hardly any real benefit, except for the state coffers. As a result, the measure fosters a climate of indirect obligation, even when no wrongdoing has occurred. The reform presents itself as a service, but at its core, it exploits uncertainty to generate revenue and expand control.
Political Process and Future Risks
The draft legislation is currently going through the parliamentary process, but its direction is clear. Italy is strengthening state oversight of private assets while simultaneously expanding a lucrative source of revenue. The reform doesn’t create clarity for citizens, but rather a levy on something that was never previously subject to mandatory reporting.
Whether other countries follow this model depends on how far Italy takes the reform. Critics see the concept as a dangerous precedent: A state is interfering with decades-old private property and demanding payments for a “legalization” that no one previously needed. This creates a system that appears more transparent but ultimately generates new burdens.