The church community Breccia die Roma bought and restructured the building in question in 2015. It had previously been used as a shop. Upon application, the Ministry of Cultural Heritage, Activities, and Tourism authorized the space’s classification as a church “without any internal or external building work.” Thus, like all places of worship in Italy, the building would receive a tax exemption.   

After the Italian Tax Agency inspected the property in 2019, the reclassification was denied in early 2020. Initially, it demanded more than 11,000€ in allegedly accrued taxes. The church filed a lawsuit against the Tax Agency and the lower court sided with them. Photos showed that the building could in no way be connected to commercial activity.   

Unfair comparison 

The Tax Agency appealed the judgment to the second-instance court, presenting photographs of the Basilica of San Silvestro, the (Great) Synagogue of Rome, and the Great Mosque of Rome. They argued that Breccia di Roma does not look like a “conventional” place of worship.    

In response, the Evangelical community asserted that Evangelical and Protestant places of worship tend to be bare and devoid of ornaments. The court received photographic examples of other Evangelical churches, which were architecturally comparable to the property at issue.  

“We don’t make money —we bring people together closer to Christ. Granted, our building does not match the Great Synagogue, a mosque, or any of the basilicas in Rome. Also, because our resources are limited, we meet in a comparatively unspectacular building. But why would a state punish us for that? Our church is not worse or less spiritual, just because our architecture is different,” Leonardo De Chirico, president of the church association asserted.   

The second-instance Tax Court of Lazio ruled the Tax Agency’s appeal unfounded. According to the court, the authorities had not only failed to consider the nature of the property’s owner, but also the Ministry’s authorization to use the building for public worship, the absence of furnishings needed to carry out commercial activity, as well as the principles that inform Evangelical religious doctrine, which do not require a church to look a certain way. Such considerations were indispensable for a proper assessment, said the court.  

“Religious freedom is an essential good for everyone”  

Again, the agency appealed. The Supreme Court of Cassation accepted the case and ruled against the church in May 2024. The decision referred to the absence of “structural interventions consistent with the characteristics related to the exercise of religious activities,” failing to define what those structural changes would have to look like for an Evangelical place of worship.   

The church community was ordered to pay the tax demanded by the Tax Agency as if it were “commercial” property. Including penalties and legal costs, the church would have to pay approximately 50,000€ by this point.  

“Paying 50.000€ in taxes and penalties is a great burden for a self-supported community of believers. Our hope is that the European Court of Human Rights will uphold our freedom of religion and equal treatment under the law. Urban space is not reserved for century-old institutions or wealthy communities. If we win our case in court, many other Evangelical churches, in addition to the country as a whole, would benefit — religious freedom is an essential good for everyone. What if the Tax Agency decides tomorrow that due to the splendor of a traditional church, the property tax has to be even higher?” added Leonardo.