In recent years, the taxation of cryptocurrencies in Italy has become one of the most complex and controversial issues for investors.In recent years, the taxation of cryptocurrencies in Italy has become one of the most complex and controversial issues for investors.

Crypto taxes in Italy: what really changes between 2023, 2024, 2025, and 2026

In recent years, the taxation of cryptocurrencies in Italy has become one of the most complex and controversial topics for investors, professionals, and industry operators.
From 2023 onwards, each budget law has introduced changes, partial clarifications, or outright regulatory contradictions, contributing to an unstable and difficult-to-interpret framework.

During a recent live session on Instagram, Stefano Capaccioli reviewed the evolution of tax regulations on crypto-assets, highlighting structural issues, interpretative ambiguities, and practical consequences for taxpayers.

From the Pre-2023 Wild West to the First True Crypto Regulation

Before 2023, cryptocurrency taxation in Italy was marked by a significant regulatory gap. In the absence of specific legislation, taxpayers and professionals navigated between interpretations from the Agenzia delle Entrate, practices that were not always consistent, and disputes that were bound to arise in the following years.

The turning point comes with the 2023 Budget Law, which for the first time introduces a regulation dedicated to crypto-assets. The approach is seemingly straightforward: capital gains realized through the onerous transfer of cryptocurrencies become taxable. However, significant issues already emerge in the initial formulation.

The 2,000 euro threshold: limit or exemption?

One of the most debated elements is the introduction of the 2,000 euro threshold. In the 2023 regulatory text, it was unclear whether this was a “hard” threshold (beyond which the entire amount becomes taxable) or an exemption (taxation only on the excess amount).

The issue did not remain theoretical: the ministerial software used for the 2023 tax returns applied the threshold as a strict limit, while for 2024 the Revenue Agency adopted the exemption criterion.
This created disparities in treatment among taxpayers and led some to pay higher taxes the previous year, also paving the way for refund claims.

The Tax Rate: From 26% to the Risk of 33%

Another critical point concerns the applicable tax rate. Originally, the taxation on crypto capital gains was set at 26%, in line with that of financial income.

Subsequently, however, the hypothesis of an increase to 33% emerged, initially even up to 42%, then scaled back. As Capaccioli explained, the regulation that provides for the increase to 33% does not come into effect immediately, but starting from 2026. Nevertheless, the mere announcement had immediate effects on investor confidence.

According to Capaccioli, such a high level of taxation also risks being unconstitutional, as it would discriminate against one asset compared to other financial instruments, violating the principle of equality enshrined in the Constitution.

A constantly evolving system

The main issue is not just the level of taxation, but the instability of the regulatory framework. Every year, rules, interpretations, and practical applications change, making it extremely difficult for taxpayers to plan consciously.

This uncertainty has already produced tangible effects: some investors have chosen to relocate abroad, others have reduced their exposure or postponed transactions, while a significant portion has simply stopped reporting, fueling a tax compliance issue.

A Scenario Demanding Clarity

The evolution of crypto taxation in Italy shows how the legislator is still seeking a balance between revenue needs, control, and innovation. However, without genuine simplification and greater regulatory stability, there is a risk of driving away capital, expertise, and technological development from the country.

Amelia Tomasicchio

Editor in Chief and co-founder at The Cryptonomist

Twitter: @ametomasicchio

Follow me on Linkedin!

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

The author of "Rich Dad Poor Dad": Prepare to buy during the gold, silver, and Bitcoin market crash.

The author of "Rich Dad Poor Dad": Prepare to buy during the gold, silver, and Bitcoin market crash.

PANews reported on February 2nd that Robert Kiyosaki, author of "Rich Dad Poor Dad," posted on the X platform that "the gold, silver, and Bitcoin markets have just
Share
PANews2026/02/02 08:21
House Judiciary Rejects Vote To Subpoena Banks CEOs For Epstein Case

House Judiciary Rejects Vote To Subpoena Banks CEOs For Epstein Case

The post House Judiciary Rejects Vote To Subpoena Banks CEOs For Epstein Case appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Topline House Judiciary Committee Republicans blocked a Democrat effort Wednesday to subpoena a group of major banks as part of a renewed investigation into late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s financial ties. Congressman Jim Jordan, R-OH, is the chairman of the committee. (Photo by Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images) Anadolu via Getty Images Key Facts A near party-line vote squashed the effort to vote on a subpoena, with Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who is leading a separate effort to force the Justice Department to release more Epstein case materials, voting alongside Democrats. The vote, if successful, would have resulted in the issuing of subpoenas to JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan, Deutsche Bank CEO Christian Sewing and Bank of New York Mellon CEO Robin Vince. The subpoenas would have specifically looked into multiple reports that claimed the four banks flagged $1.5 billion in suspicious transactions linked to Epstein. The failed effort from Democrats followed an FBI oversight hearing in which agency director Kash Patel misleadingly claimed the FBI cannot release many of the files it has on Epstein. Get Forbes Breaking News Text Alerts: We’re launching text message alerts so you’ll always know the biggest stories shaping the day’s headlines. Text “Alerts” to (201) 335-0739 or sign up here. Crucial Quote Dimon, who attended a lunch with Senate Republicans before the vote, according to Politico, told reporters, “We regret any association with that man at all. And, of course, if it’s a legal requirement, we would conform to it. We have no issue with that.” Chief Critic “Republicans had the chance to subpoena the CEOs of JPMorgan, Bank of America, Deutsche Bank, and Bank of New York Mellon to expose Epstein’s money trail,” the House Judiciary Democrats said in a tweet. “Instead, they tried to bury…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 08:02
XAU/USD falls below $4,800 as Warsh pick eases Fed independence concerns

XAU/USD falls below $4,800 as Warsh pick eases Fed independence concerns

The post XAU/USD falls below $4,800 as Warsh pick eases Fed independence concerns appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Gold price (XAU/USD) tumbles to around $4
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/02/02 07:53