La crescita dell’Italia nel 2026 “può arrivare a +1%”, in linea con le principali economie europee e sopra le previsioni. Lo ha detto la presidente del Consiglio Giorgia Meloni, intervenendo all’assemblea di Assolombarda. Secondo la premier, “sono risultati che ci devono incoraggiare” perché rappresentano un “segnale che non va sminuito”. Meloni ha poi precisato che “la crescita in Italia è ancora troppo debole”, ma ha sottolineato che “la nostra economia ha retto l’onda d’urto di scenari complessi”.

Giorgia Meloni e il ringraziamento alle imprese

Nel suo intervento, la presidente del Consiglio si è rivolta direttamente agli imprenditori presenti all’assemblea. “Voglio ringraziarvi a nome della nazione per il vostro contributo”, ha detto. La premier ha poi aggiunto: “Se l’Italia è forte, autorevole e ammirata nel mondo, il merito è soprattutto delle imprese e dei loro lavoratori, è di chi cerca di non accontentarsi perché in un mondo che corre sempre più rischia di non esserci spazio per chi indietreggia e per chi tentenna”. Giorgia Meloni ha collegato la tenuta dell’economia italiana al ruolo del sistema produttivo e alla capacità delle imprese di affrontare un contesto internazionale instabile.

“Lo Stato è alleato” dell’industria

“Lo Stato è alleato” dell’industria e “non la considera un soggetto da tassare”, ha affermato Giorgia Meloni durante il suo intervento. La presidente del Consiglio ha poi spiegato: “Un’industria che vuole creare ha certamente bisogno di volontà, ma ha anche bisogno di uno Stato che accompagni, che la consideri un alleato e che non la consideri un mero soggetto da tassare quando non direttamente da controllare o addirittura da ostacolare”.

La Premier ha ribadito anche il ruolo delle imprese nella reputazione internazionale del Paese: “Se l’Italia è autorevole e ammirata nel mondo il merito è soprattutto delle sue imprese e dei suoi lavoratori”. Poi ha aggiunto: “Il merito è di chi sa trasformare l’incertezza in decisione, l’ambizione in traguardo, la crisi in opportunità, e di chi non si accontenta”.

Meloni su intelligenza artificiale e investimenti

La premier ha affrontato anche il tema dell’intelligenza artificiale e ritiene “urgente una governance dell’intelligenza artificiale”, ma il tema “va affrontata a livello globale”. La presidente del Consiglio ha ricordato che l’Italia ha portato il tema al centro della presidenza del G7, “chiamando a parlarne Papa Francesco”.

Sul piano delle misure economiche, ha richiamato la legge nazionale sull’intelligenza artificiale: “La legge nazionale sull’IA ha messo a disposizione 1 miliardo di euro di investimenti per le imprese che sviluppano Intelligenza artificiale, cybersicurezza e tecnologie abilitanti”.

Nel suo intervento, Meloni ha annunciato anche un lavoro in corso con il ministro dell’Economia Giancarlo Giorgetti. “Un primo segnale per dire che l’Italia non rimanga indietro ed al quale ora ne vogliamo aggiungere un altro”, ha detto.

Giorgia Meloni ha poi aggiunto: “Considero di buon senso trovare il modo di promuovere anche gli investimenti in software utilizzati tramite i contratti di cloud”. Da qui l’annuncio: “Voglio annunciare che con il ministro Giorgetti stiamo lavorando per introdurre nella legge di bilancio una misura di carattere fiscale per agevolare gli investimenti per questa tipologia di beni”.

Caro energia, le risposte strutturali

Non poteva mancare anche un passaggio sul caro energia, Giorgia Meloni durante l’intervento ad Assolombarda ha spiegato servono interventi non limitati all’emergenza. “Se non costruiamo risposte strutturali e di lungo periodo rischiamo di restare in balia dell’emergenza”, ha detto la premier. Il riferimento è alla necessità di rendere il sistema produttivo meno esposto agli shock energetici e più competitivo rispetto agli altri Paesi europei.

The European Commission has rejected demands from Italy and Greece for additional exemptions from EU spending rules as the Middle East energy crisis drives inflation higher, exposing renewed divisions over how much financial assistance European governments can provide.

The European Commission has rejected requests from Italy and Greece for greater freedom to increase public spending in response to the energy crisis, resisting pressure from two member states that argue existing budget restrictions are limiting their ability to protect households and businesses.

The decision, confirmed on 8 October, follows renewed appeals from Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis for measures recognising the exceptional financial burden imposed by higher energy prices.

Meloni wants Brussels to take greater account of unexpected inflation when assessing national budgets and to permit additional tax revenue generated by rising prices to be used for energy relief. Mitsotakis has sought the exclusion of temporary support measures for consumers and businesses from the expenditure limits agreed under the EU’s fiscal framework.

Economic Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis rejected the argument for further concessions, maintaining that the existing arrangements already take inflation into account and provide mechanisms for responding to exceptional circumstances.

The disagreement comes as Europe’s governments confront the economic consequences of the Middle East conflict, including higher fuel costs, inflationary pressures and increased demands for state intervention.

Italy’s increasingly difficult budget choices

For Italy, the dispute adds to a fiscal problem that has been developing throughout the year.

The government expects its budget deficit to rise to 3.4 per cent of GDP in 2027, reversing an earlier objective of reducing borrowing below the EU’s three per cent reference value.

As EU Today reported earlier this month, Rome plans to use additional fiscal room for defence and energy-related expenditure, while public debt is projected to remain close to 138 per cent of GDP.

The new request concerns the treatment of inflation and the financial support required to offset its effects.

Energy inflation creates an unusual budgetary problem. Governments can receive additional nominal tax revenue as prices rise, particularly through consumption taxes, while simultaneously facing public pressure to compensate consumers for higher living costs.

Meloni argues that such unexpected revenue should be available for targeted assistance without forcing equivalent reductions elsewhere in national expenditure.

Brussels is reluctant to accept arrangements that could turn temporary increases in tax receipts into an opportunity for permanent spending expansion.

Italy’s position also reflects the political competition between defence spending and domestic economic support. Rome has accepted the need for higher military expenditure but faces immediate pressure from households and energy-intensive industries.

That competition was already apparent when the government chose to prioritise energy relief over the full use of defence-spending flexibility.

Greece seeks different treatment for emergency support

Greece’s request is more narrowly focused on the treatment of temporary assistance under the EU’s expenditure rules.

Athens argues that measures intended to help businesses and households manage exceptional energy costs should not be counted against the normal spending limits.

The Greek government faces an economic environment in which higher imported energy prices threaten household purchasing power and business profitability, particularly in sectors dependent on transport and fuel.

Excluding temporary relief from expenditure calculations would give Athens additional room to intervene without breaching its agreed fiscal trajectory.

The Commission, however, has resisted establishing further exemptions beyond those already provided in the fiscal framework.

Its objection is institutional as well as financial. If additional categories of emergency expenditure are repeatedly excluded from fiscal calculations, the system becomes increasingly difficult to enforce consistently across the Union.

The limits of Europe’s reformed fiscal rules

The EU revised its fiscal governance framework in 2024, introducing nationally agreed expenditure paths intended to provide greater flexibility while maintaining sustainable public finances.

The Commission’s rules on exceptional circumstances permit member states to depart temporarily from normal requirements under specified conditions.

Those provisions have already been used to accommodate higher defence expenditure, while the Commission has also issued guidance on their application to energy-security investments.

Temporary financial assistance intended to reduce household energy bills, however, is not necessarily treated in the same way as investment in infrastructure that reduces Europe’s long-term dependence on imported fuel.

That distinction has become a source of friction between Brussels and national capitals.

Governments argue that the immediate economic effects of an international crisis require exceptional measures. The Commission is concerned that repeated concessions could weaken the credibility of the spending framework.

A wider dispute over Europe’s economic response

The Commission’s decision also comes as France faces increasing pressure over its debt and budget deficit.

The deterioration in French borrowing conditions has reinforced concerns about the risks associated with heavily indebted governments continuing to expand expenditure.

France, Italy and Greece have different fiscal positions, but the problems confronting them originate partly in the same combination of expensive energy, weak economic growth and competing spending commitments.

The dispute will now feed into preparations for the European Council meeting on 15–16 October, where energy prices and economic competitiveness are prominent agenda items.

EU leaders are expected to consider targeted and temporary measures to reduce the burden on businesses and consumers, alongside longer-term initiatives intended to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

The Commission’s refusal to provide Italy and Greece with further fiscal exemptions establishes the limits within which those discussions will take place.

National governments remain free to introduce assistance, but Brussels is insisting that they account for its cost within the fiscal rules already agreed.

For Rome and Athens, the question is whether those rules provide sufficient room to respond to an energy crisis whose duration remains uncertain.