Categories: Insights


24 Apr 2014

Court of Cassation: amounts due by the employer in compliance with a settlement agreement are subject to social security contributions (Il Sole 24 Ore, April 24, 2014, page 42)

Court of Cassation, with judgment no. 9180 of April 23, 2014, moving away from a previous case law guidance (judgments no. 49/1997 and no. 6923/1996), stated that amounts paid by the employer are not exempted from social security contributions just because paid in compliance with a settlement agreement. In particular, the Court clarified that the character of settlement conventionally set by the parties does not prevent the payment of social security contributions to INPS. The assertion of the Court is based on the provision of art. 12 Law no. 153/1969 which includes in the contributive income every amount paid to the employee in connection with the employment relationship. According to the Court, the concept of compensation from a contributive standpoint does not correspond to the one given by the Civil Code in the art. 2099: thus because the first one supersedes the concept of “consideration”, including also amounts which are not necessarily connected to the employment relationship. Moreover, Court stated that amounts paid by the employer for a cause which is not connected to the employment relationship, in addition to those listed in art. 12 Law no. 153/1969, are exempted from the payment of social security contributions to the Institute.
Subscribe to our newsletter

Contact

Need information? Write to us and our team of experts will respond as soon as possible.

Fill in the form

More news and insights

12 Oct 2026

“AI tools, remote work and confidential data: employer liability in a borderless environment” – IBA Conference 2026

At the IBA Annual Conference 2026 in Copenhagen, our Managing Partner Vittorio De Luca moderated a panel on one of the most pressing challenges facing employers today: the…

1 Oct 2026

Corporate e-mail and defensive monitoring: when the GDPR and employment law lead to different outcomes 

The Piaggio case clearly illustrates how the same set of facts can give rise to profoundly different assessments depending on the perspective adopted. In its decision of 13…

1 Oct 2026

NASpI and Reinstatement: the Employee’s Election Causes Loss of the Benefit 

Headnote   In its recent judgment No. 24981 of 3 September 2026, the Italian Supreme Court held that, where a dismissal is set aside with an order of reinstatement…

1 Oct 2026

Did you know that… testimony given in court may have disciplinary relevance and, in the most serious cases, justify dismissal? 

The Italian Supreme Court, Labour Section, by order no. 25687 of 22 September 2026, addressed the issue of the disciplinary relevance of statements made by an employee in…

29 Sep 2026

Shadow AI in the workplace: how to govern risks, data, and security (Agenda digitale, 29 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Martina De Angeli)

The spread of artificial intelligence tools used without corporate authorization exposes businesses to risks involving personal data, confidential information, know-how, and cybersecurity. To govern Shadow AI, organizations need…

24 Sep 2026

The concept of “territorial scope” in a non-compete agreement (Top24 Lavoro Ai – Il Sole 24 Ore, 24 September 2026 – Vittorio De Luca and Alessandro Ferrari)

Interpretative issues in light of the most recent case law on the nullity of non-compete agreements due to the indeterminacy of territorial scope By an order issued on…