This paper examines the legal link between the individual right to pension benefits and the five-year limitation period for payment of social security contributions. The Author proposes a critique of the recent case law of the Italian Supreme Court which denied this link, consequently denying workers the right to obtain public coverage of contribution gaps caused by employer omissions. Taking its cue from a recent ruling of a Tribunal, the article explores the soundness and the implications of the hypothesis of postponing the deadline for payment of social security contributions until the end of the employment relationship. Such an idea would mitigate the injustices created by the aforementioned Supreme Court ruling. However, according to the Author, it would have excessively burdensome implications for employers. In order to achieve a balance between pension rights, the protection of entrepreneurs in their relations with the social security administration and the protection of the latter's finances, it seems preferable to restore the legal significance of the five-year limitation period as a limit of public coverage against social security contribution omissions. The recent cancellation of this protection should be submitted to the Constitutional Court for review.
Casale, D. (2025). Prescrizione della contribuzione e automaticità previdenziale: alla ricerca di un equilibrio tra diritti pensionistici, affidamento datoriale e finanze pubbliche. ADL. ARGOMENTI DI DIRITTO DEL LAVORO, fasc.5, 795-807.
Prescrizione della contribuzione e automaticità previdenziale: alla ricerca di un equilibrio tra diritti pensionistici, affidamento datoriale e finanze pubbliche
Casale D.
2025
Abstract
This paper examines the legal link between the individual right to pension benefits and the five-year limitation period for payment of social security contributions. The Author proposes a critique of the recent case law of the Italian Supreme Court which denied this link, consequently denying workers the right to obtain public coverage of contribution gaps caused by employer omissions. Taking its cue from a recent ruling of a Tribunal, the article explores the soundness and the implications of the hypothesis of postponing the deadline for payment of social security contributions until the end of the employment relationship. Such an idea would mitigate the injustices created by the aforementioned Supreme Court ruling. However, according to the Author, it would have excessively burdensome implications for employers. In order to achieve a balance between pension rights, the protection of entrepreneurs in their relations with the social security administration and the protection of the latter's finances, it seems preferable to restore the legal significance of the five-year limitation period as a limit of public coverage against social security contribution omissions. The recent cancellation of this protection should be submitted to the Constitutional Court for review.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


