We won a case against INPS: a US Citizen self-employed in Italy must only pay Social Security in the US
In this article, we will talk about an important case we have won last week against INPS (the Italian Social Security Administration) with our partners Lawyers Livio Galla and Beatrice Cantele, who are the two Labor Attorneys who have successfully represented our Client.
The client is a US Citizen who moved to Italy ago and started an Italian Self-Employment position while paying Self-Employment Tax in the US: he had also made several unduly payments to INPS.
The Agreement on Social Security between Italy and the US gives exclusively to the US the right to receive his Social Security payments.
With the help of Attorneys Livio Galla and Beatrice Cantele, the Client started a litigation case against INPS to receive the refund of the unduly payments.
After a few tactical defensive moves, INPS had to acknowledge the Client's rights and decided to cancel the client position and start the refund procedure.
1. THE CASE: A SELF-EMPLOYED US CITIZEN LIVING AND WORKING IN ITALY
We will start by saying that the Client who started a consultation with Tax&Legal Firm is a US Citizen (but not Italian Citizen) who moved to Italy a few years ago and who started a self-employment position by opening a Partita IVA.
We have already talked about this scenario in other previous articles:
For a mistake of his previous consultant, he was incorrectly registered into the Gestione Artigiani e Commercianti of the INPS (Istituto Nazionale Previdenza Sociale - The Italian Social Security Administration).
He then started making payments to INPS: the "contributi annuali fissi" amounts to approximately 4.000 euro per year.
He was also paying the Self-Employment Tax in the US: in this way, he was double paying Social Security in both Countries.
The first question on this case is the following one: which Country has the right to get his Social Security Payments?
Italy, as the country of his residence, or the US as the Country of his citizenship?
We already know that there is a Convention between Italy and the US on Social Security, and we have already treated in deep these issues in a previous post:
After starting the consultation with our Tax&Legal Firm, we explained to him that he only had to pay Self-Employment Tax in the US and that the payments he was making to INPS were not due.
This is clearly stated into Article 7 of the Social Security Agreement between the two Countries: it's important to remember that the case we are considering here is different from the case in which the individual is a double Citizen. In this latter case, the self-employed person can decide whether to pay his/her Social Security in Italy or in the US by making an Election.
This election must be made in 90 days from the day he/she opened the self-employment position.
For more details on that you can read the following article:
We then asked Lawyers Livio Galla and Beatrice Cantele to take the case, as in this case it's necessary to involve an Attorney who is specialized in Labor Litigations and in the relations with the Italian Social Security Administration.
2. THE FIRST TWO STEPS WITH INPS
After the Client had expressed his will to start a litigation against INPS, our Labor Lawyers started to draw the strategy: the first step was to formally ask INPS for the cancellation of his position "ex tunc" (that means with retroactive effects from the starting moment of his registration). This was done via a certified form of e- mail (called PEC – Posta Elettronica Certificata) to INPS. The request was completed with all the documents and information necessary for the INPS to understand clearly that our client was right.
INPS never answered back on this first formal request.
The second step taken by our Lawyers was to send the same request, and all the attachments, in a different way, which consists of filing an administrative appeal through the INPS digital platform.
In this case, the INPS responded by dismissing the appeal as inadmissible.
At this point, Attorneys Galla and Cantele decided for the last step, the formal litigation against INPS in front of a Labor Judge.
3. THE LITIGATION AGAINST INPS STARTS
The "silence" of INPS after the first two steps were taken almost for granted by our Labor Attorneys: they knew that INPS never engages seriously unless there is a serious threat.
They then started formally the litigation with INPS, reiterating the same requests and explaining the Judge the first two steps that went "unheard".
The Labor Judge (Giudice del Lavoro) fixed the first judicial hearing for mid-December, 2026.
Attorneys Galla and Cantele were ready for a quite heated judicial battle with INPS, as the INPS behaviour on the first two steps seemed to be a sign that INPS believed they had a good chance in the case.
4. THE UNEXPECTED TWIST: INPS COLLAPSES AND CONCEDE
Unexpectedly, after the INPS was notified of the legal appeal but before even having the first judicial hearing, INPS sent a formal communication to the client telling him that:
1) Even if his behaviour (the registration) was typical of a person that must pay his Social Security in Italy, Art. 7 of the above-mentioned Agreement leaves no room for interpretation and gives the US the exclusive right to receive the Social Security payments, once clarified that he was only US Citizen.
2) INPS, consequently, issued a "Provvedimento di Autotutela" by which INPS cancelled from the beginning the Client's position.
3) INPS also said that they were ready to refund him with all the amounts that were unduly paid over the years by the client.
This was a clear victory for our Client and for us, as INPS had to admit our thesis was the correct one: the Client was, obviously, very happy.
The litigation, though, isn't yet over for some technical aspects that go beyond the purpose of this article: the important part of this story is that, once faced with the perspective of going in front of the Labor Judge with such a position, the INPS central offices in Rome have decided to concede and admit defeat BEFORE the Judicial verdict.
5. THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS VICTORY: ALL OTHER CASES CAN NOW BE SOLVED
The importance of this litigation victory is exactly this: victory doesn't come from a Judge's decision, which can always be appealed and overturned, but it comes as an important precedent as it was INPS itself that had to admit that the right course of action was the cancellation and the refunding.
Clearly, it's not possible to solve all the problems and conflicts with INPS in the same exact way, but this case is an important precedent, which can be used by our Lawyers to defend other Clients in the same situation: their outstanding job and expertise on this field made the difference in this interesting case, granting our Client an important victory.
It also showed that such a complicated case can be resolved in a matter of a few months.
YOU MAY BE ALSO INTERESTED IN:
1) Our section of posts tagged with the keyword "SOCIAL SECURITY" that you can find at the following link:
2) Our section of posts tagged with the keyword "TAX RESIDENCE" that you can find at the following link:
3) Our section of posts tagged with the keyword "MOVING TO ITALY" that you can find at the following link:
4) The following posts:
CONTACT US FOR MORE INFORMATION
If you need more information you can send an email to:
enrico.povolo@dottcomm.net
or make a phone call to the following number:
+39 0444 322987
Enrico Povolo