UBI Banca Group

NOTICES OF TAX ASSESSMENT
BPB Immobiliare (2003) increased taxation of €16.4 million, fines of €17.6 million
This was a contribution of company property operations considered by the tax authorities as the
disposal of assets.
A ruling was given fully in favour of the company by the Tax Commission of the Province of
Bergamo against which the tax authorities appealed to the Regional Tax Commission of
Lombardy. The latter rejected the appeal of the authorities confirming the ruling appealed against.
Banca Carime (2003) increased taxation of €14.4 million, fines of €22.6 million
This was a contribution of company property operations considered by the tax authorities as the
disposal of assets.
A ruling was given fully in favour of the company by the Tax Commission of the Province of
Cosenza against which the tax authorities appealed to the Regional Tax Commission of Calabria.
The hearing was held on 14 th July and the relative ruling has still not yet been issued.
UBI Banca (2003) increased taxation of €5.3 million, fines of €6.4 million
This was a contribution of company property operations considered by the tax authorities as the
disposal of assets.
A ruling was given fully in favour of the company by the Tax Commission of the Province of
Bergamo against which the tax authorities appealed to the Regional Tax Commission of
Lombardy. The latter rejected the appeal of the authorities confirming the ruling appealed against.
UBI Banca (2004, 2005 and 2006) increased taxation of euro €13.2 million, fines of €12.2 million
These were complex transactions designed to strengthen capital performed in 2001 with the
authorisation of the Bank of Italy. The tax authorities alleged failure to apply a withholding tax on
interest paid to a foreign subsidiary on deposits made by the subsidiary, which were reclassified
by the tax inspectors as financing. On the basis of expert opinion it is considered that the tax
regime applied by the bank – which was then Banca Popolare di Bergamo and Banca Popolare
Commercio e Industria – complied with the requirements of contracts and the law. Since the
question involves more than one year, notices of tax assessment for 2004, 2005 and 2006 have
been received so far. An appeal has been lodged for the latter years, while for 2004 the Tax
Commission of the Province of Milan rejected the appeal lodged by UBI Banca although it
considered that fines were not due because of the objective uncertainty surrounding the
legislation. On the basis of expert opinion it is considered that the tax regime applied by the bank
complied with the requirements of contracts and the law. The relative tax demands were appealed
against before the Tax Commission of the Province of Milan. While the verdict is pending for 2005,
a collection order for €2.86 million was issued which the UBI Banca paid.
Banco di Brescia (2004, 2005 and 2006) increased taxation of €4.75 million, fines of €8.61
million
These were complex transactions designed to strengthen capital performed in 2000 with the
authorisation of the Bank of Italy. The tax authorities alleged failure to apply a withholding tax on
interest paid to a foreign subsidiary on deposits made by the subsidiary, which were reclassified
by the tax inspectors as financing. On the basis of expert opinion it is considered that the tax
regime applied by the bank complied with the requirements of contracts and the law. The relative
tax demands were appealed against before the Tax Commission of the Province of Milan. While the
verdict is pending for 2004 and 2005, a collection order for €1.92 million was issued which Banco
di Brescia paid.
UBI Leasing (2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006) increased taxation of €3.9 million, fines of €8.8 million
Alleged improper application of a subsidised VAT rate on marine lease transactions or undue
deduction of VAT on invoices for non existent transactions and improper quantification of the
recognition of non existent invoices for IRES and IRAP purposes. At present the tax authorities
have issued an interim collection order limited to the IRES demands for a total of €22 thousand.
As part of the “second level” assessment because the tax consolidation option was chosen for that
335