Categories: Insights


21 Jul 2011

SOCIAL SECURITY CONTRIBUTIONS FOR SICKNESS: FROM 1ST MAY THE EMPLOYER WHO PAYS DIRECTLY THE ABSENT EMPLOYEE IS NOT EXCLUDED ANYMORE

 INPS, with message no. 14490/2011, pointed out that the Government had removed the exemption provided for the employers which substitute the Institute in order to pay the sick employee, as in the case of Tertiary sector. In fact, Article 18, paragraph 16, point a) of the Law by Decree no. 98/2011 adds to Article 20 of Law by Decree no. 112/2008 the paragraph 1-bis, which imposes the obligation concerning the social security contribution for illness, as of May 1st, 2011, to the employers who, by law or by collective agreement, pays the sickness economic treatment instead of INPS. In the same message, INPS specifies that the same paragraph 16, point b), does not allow the claiming back of the social security contributions paid by employers up to the abovementioned date. In fact, as of that date, the employers have to pay the social security contribution for financing the illness indemnity to the employees to whom the social security insurance is applicable.
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…