"With the estate, we'll win the election". But the room is empty.

At the Palazzo Madama’s Montecitorio chamber, a quiet gathering took place as representatives from the Democratic Party, the Five Star Movement, and the Avs party convened to discuss a proposal known as the “patrimoniale,” or wealth tax. The session was held in the Sala Berlinguer at 3 p.m., with journalists and media personnel filling the room while few lawmakers were present. The event centered around the publication of a book titled “Tassare i milionari. Prendere ai ricchi per dare ai poveri” by journalist Riccardo Staglianò, which advocates for a new form of taxation targeting the wealthiest citizens. The discussion featured three prominent figures: Chiara Appendino of the Five Star Movement, Maria Cecilia Guerra of the Democratic Party, and Elisabetta Piccolotti of the Avs. Journalist Eva Giovannini moderated the conversation, which aimed to explore the feasibility and political appeal of implementing a tax on the ultra-rich. The proposed measure, inspired by similar initiatives in other countries, would target individuals with a net worth exceeding five million euros, excluding their primary residence, and apply a levy on just 0.1% of Italy’s population. Staglianò emphasized during his opening remarks that he had chosen not to use the term “patrimoniale” directly, instead opting for more neutral language. He argued that the current Italian tax system already imposes multiple levies on property and wealth, though these often fail to address systemic inequality. The debate quickly turned toward whether such a policy could gain public support and how it might align with broader progressive agendas. Maria Cecilia Guerra, representing the Democratic Party, expressed cautious optimism. She acknowledged the complexity of introducing a new wealth tax, noting that Italy already has several forms of property-based taxation. However, she suggested that reforming existing structures rather than creating entirely new ones might be more effective. Guerra also raised concerns about the potential impact on middle-class taxpayers, emphasizing that they are already heavily burdened under the current income tax system. Chiara Appendino, in contrast, took a more assertive stance. She criticized the Italian media and political establishment for failing to challenge the influence of the wealthy elite. “Why does the system protect the super-rich?” she asked, citing examples such as the families of industrialists and business magnates who have amassed vast fortunes. She advocated for a direct approach, calling for a “millionaire tax” that would force the wealthiest individuals to contribute meaningfully to public coffers. Her argument aligned with international trends, including proposals from organizations like Oxfam, which estimate that approximately 50,000 Italians meet the criteria for such a tax. Elisabetta Piccolotti, speaking on behalf of the Avs, went even further. She claimed that the introduction of the patrimoniale could serve as a decisive factor in winning future elections. “I am convinced that this tax can help us win the next elections,” she stated, suggesting that the measure might resonate strongly with voters who feel increasingly disenfranchised by economic inequality. Her comments sparked mixed reactions among the small audience, some of whom appeared skeptical about the practicality of such a policy. Despite the enthusiasm, one question remained unanswered: why continue using the term “patrimoniale” if it risks alienating potential supporters? The discussion ended without a clear resolution, leaving many to wonder whether the name itself might become a point of contention in the broader political discourse.