The 5xmille turns twenty. It was 2006 when the financial law of that year introduced it on an experimental basis, and already in the first year 16 million Italians chose to allocate a portion of their IRPEF to the Third Sector, research institutions or Municipalities. Since then the tool, which taxpayers can indicate in their tax return, has never stopped: in 2025, according to data just published by the Revenue Agency, signatures have reached 18,460,316 – half a million more than the previous year – and the 95,980 entities admitted will share 602,470,220 euros, the highest figure since the measure existed.
But behind the record lies an extreme concentration that transforms this instrument of fiscal democracy into something much more similar to a marketing competition, in which the big guys always win and the small ones collect the crumbs.
How it works, who it is intended for and how to donate it
The 5×1000 is a share equal to 0.5% of the IRPEF already owed by the taxpayer. It doesn’t cost anything extra: it’s a matter of choosing where to direct part of the taxes that you pay anyway. In the tax return – in the 730 form, in the Single Certification or in the Personal Income model – just place a signature in the box dedicated to Third Sector entities and, if you want to support a specific organisation, add the tax code of that entity in the appropriate space.
The law provides for seven categories of recipients: Third Sector bodies registered in RUNTS (the Single National Registry, which has replaced the NPO Registry since 2022), scientific research bodies and universities, health research bodies, amateur sports associations recognized by CONI, social activities carried out by their municipality of residence, bodies dealing with cultural and landscape heritage, and managers of protected natural areas. A taxpayer can express only one preference, but can do so at the same time as the 8 and 2×1000: the three choices are not mutually exclusive.
However, there is a crucial aspect that many do not know: if you do not choose, that share is not redistributed among the entities, but remains in the state coffers. And the problem of the spending ceiling adds to this silent loss: for 2025, the limit set by the Budget Law was 610 million euros. According to the “5 per thousand, but for real” campaign promoted by Vita.it together with 67 large Third Sector organizations, the ceiling has already been exceeded: the total amounts assigned to the admitted entities and set aside for possible appeals coincides exactly with the 610 million available, which means that the State has proportionally reduced the amounts to all recipients compared to the real preferences expressed by taxpayers.
To which associations will the 602 million of the 5×1000 2025 go: the list of beneficiaries
The official list published by the Revenue Agency – seven PDF files that we analyzed line by line, for a total of 95,980 records – tells of a distribution that has nothing democratic about it.
The top 100 institutions out of 95,980 – 0.1% of the total – share 49.6% of the funds, almost half of the entire pie. The AIRC Foundation for Cancer Research alone takes home 82.7 million euros, equal to 13.7% of the national total: one institution out of almost 96,000 absorbs almost one and a half euros in ten. The top five entities together are already worth 21.9% of the total, the top ten 28.8%, the top five hundred 60.6%.
Behind these numbers there is a ranking that is repeated almost unchanged every year. In second place the Piedmontese Foundation for Cancer Research (14.3 million), followed by Emergency (13.4 million), the Lega del Filo d’Oro Foundation (11.3 million), the AIL against leukemia and lymphomas (10.2 million). Followed by the European Institute of Oncology, Doctors Without Borders, the Italian Multiple Sclerosis Foundation, Save the Children, the Anna Meyer Pediatric Hospital in Florence.
The other side of this concentration is the long queue of local entities that struggle to collect anything. Almost one in five entities – 19,340 organizations – received exactly zero euros: no signatures, no transfers. Another 972 have collected less than one hundred euros, the minimum threshold below which the law does not even provide for disbursement. The median of the entire system is 707 euros: half of the institutions that receive something receive less than seven hundred euros a year.
Concentration also emerges when looking at the categories. Scientific and health research collects, combined, 37% of the total funds – 223 million euros – with only 3,229 institutions out of 95,980. This means that 3.4% of institutions share almost four tenths of the entire allocation, with an average amount per institution exceeding 69,000 euros, compared to the general median of 707.
The signature market: how large organizations organize the contribution campaign
This concentration is not only explained by taxpayers’ trust in oncology research or humanitarian aid. There is a communications industry that every year, between April and September – the weeks in which the 730 is filled out – sets in motion to gain the signature of those who are opening their tax return.
AIRC is the most visible example. In 2024 the Foundation spent 2.94 million euros on communication, which is equivalent to over 4% of what it had collected from the 5xmille the previous year, as calculated by the CPI Observatory of the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart. The 2024 budget shows overall fundraising costs in excess of €27 million, of which over €5 million went to fundraising staff. The efficiency communicated by the Foundation itself to Sole 24 Ore – 17-18% of costs compared to disbursements – is real, but 3 million in communication is a structurally unattainable figure for a social cooperative in Padua or a voluntary association in Matera.
The campaigns of large organizations develop on multiple levels. AIRC has a partnership with Radio Italia which promotes the tax code on the radio platform, organizes a roadshow in Italian cities during the declaration period, and during the “Research Days” it activates a partnership with RAI which involves TV, radio, newspapers, web and social media for eight consecutive days. On the corporate front, AIRC asks companies to propose to their employees to donate the 5×1000 to research, providing digital information materials to be distributed via email: a channel of access to the public that presupposes institutional relationships that most institutions do not have. Doctors Without Borders has instead built a digital ecosystem optimized to intercept the organic searches of those who fill out the declaration – detailed guides for each type of tax model, updated every year with the correct deadlines.
However, there is a regulatory aspect that needs to be clarified, because it often generates confusion. The law – the Prime Ministerial Decree of July 2020 – explicitly prohibits entities from using the funds received from the 5xmille to finance awareness campaigns on the 5xmille itself, with the obligation to return the sums in case of violation. AIRC and other large organizations do not violate this rule: they finance the campaigns with their own ordinary fundraising budget, fueled by bequests, private donations and corporate sponsorships. The distinction is formally correct. But the point is exactly this: those who already have a developed fundraising system can invest in communication to grow further, while those who don’t have one cannot use the 5xmille to build it. The result is a virtuous circle reserved for those who are already great.
The ASSIF Observatory – which monitors the sector for the Italian Fundraiser Association – recently photographed the consequences of this imbalance: over 13,000 entities, 13.5% of those admitted to the allocation, do not receive even a signature. And the number of organizations that collect less than one hundred euros is growing by 21%. The Observatory calls for public policies to support fundraising and, in particular, the possibility for entities to allocate a portion of the funds received to the promotion of their campaign in subsequent years – exactly the opposite of what the current law provides – so that the 5xthousand instrument does not remain the prerogative of a limited number of organizations.
The difference (which everyone gets wrong) with 8 and 2xthousand
The 5xmille appears in the tax return together with two other instruments, the 8 and the 2xmille, which many confuse or use incorrectly. The first thing to know is that they are not alternatives: you can sign all three in the same declaration without paying a cent more, because in all cases these are quotas of the IRPEF already due, not additional payments.
The differences, however, are substantial. The 8xmille is the oldest instrument: it was created in 1985, implementing the Villa Madama Agreements of 1984 between the Italian State and the Holy See, and is worth 0.8% of the entire IRPEF – an absolute percentage of the overall tax revenue, not of the individual taxpayer’s share. It can only be allocated to the State, for purposes of social and humanitarian interest such as food aid, natural disasters and school construction, or to one of the religious confessions that have entered into an agreement with the State: the Catholic Church, the Waldensian Evangelical Churches, the Jewish Community, the Buddhist Union and eleven others. The most significant difference compared to the 5xthousand is that the 8xthousand does not have a spending ceiling – everything that taxpayers allocate is actually paid out – and above all that those who do not sign lose nothing: the share of those who do not express a preference is redistributed proportionally among all the beneficiaries. In practice, not signing the 8×1000 is equivalent to delegating the choice to other taxpayers, and largely ends up with the Catholic Church.
The 2xmille is the most recent and least known, introduced in 2014. It is worth 0.2% of the IRPEF and can be allocated to political parties registered in a special register or, from 2021, to recognized cultural associations. Only 3.3% of taxpayers use it. Here too, those who do not sign do not see their share redistributed: unlike the 8xthousand, the sum simply remains with the State.
The point common to all three measures, and which is worth repeating, is the one with which this story opens: not signing saves nothing. The tax is still paid. The choice is only who decides where that money goes – the taxpayer, or the state.
