Categories: Insights, Publications


28 Jun 2018

Prohibition of cash payment for remunerations and invalidity of pay slip signature as proof (Newsletter Norme & Tributi n. 125 – Camera di Commercio Italo-Germanica – Vittorio De Luca, Luciano Vella)

As established by the Budget Law 2018 (Law No. 205/17), effective 1st July, employers and private clients will have to pay to their workers wages/remunerations and any advance through traceable means. It will no longer be possible to pay by cash and this independently of the type of work relationship established. The law is clearly aimed at preventing money laundering (predicate offence of Legislative Decree 231) as well as to discourage any worker’s abuse. To this end, the Budget Law specifies that the signature applied by the worker on the pay slip no longer represents proof of payment of the remuneration. Therefore, effective from 1st July, the payment methods allowed will be only those established by the Budget Law, under penalty of administrative financial fines ranging from a minimum of EUR 1,000 to a maximum of EUR 5,000. And this links to the recent judgement of the Court of Cassation (judgement No. 25979/18) which states that in the case employees are forced to accept pay slips showing amounts lower than what it is contractually agreed, both the entrepreneur personally and the company are liable pursuant to Legislative Decree 231/01. Therefore, it would be appropriate to implement specific procedures to be included in Model 231 to trace the flow of the wages/remunerations paid.

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

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…

16 Sep 2026

Did you know that… repeated violations of company procedures may justify the dismissal of a store manager?

The Italian Supreme Court (Labour Section), in Order No. 25231 of 11 September 2026, upheld the lawfulness of the dismissal for just cause of a store manager who…