With Note n. 2243 of 4 March, the Ministry of Labor provided clarifications on article 4, paragraph 2, of the Third sector Code with reference to the management, coordination and control of Third sector entities.
Come noto, il comma citato prevede che “non sono enti del Terzo settore le amministrazioni pubbliche di cui all’art. 1, comma 2, del D.lgs. n. 165/2001, le formazioni e le associazioni politiche, i sindacati, le associazioni professionali e di rappresentanza di categorie economiche, le associazioni di datori di lavoro” (ai quali per brevità si farà riferimento, nel prosieguo, anche come “soggetti esclusi”), “nonché gli enti sottoposti a direzione e coordinamento o controllati dai suddetti enti”. Il medesimo comma prevede, con riferimento alle suddette situazioni di esclusione alcune eccezioni, aventi carattere tassativo: (i) i soggetti operanti nel settore della protezione civile; (ii) i corpi volontari dei vigili del fuoco delle Province autonome di Trento e di Bolzano e della Regione autonoma della Valle d’Aosta; (iii) le associazioni o fondazioni di diritto privato ex IPAB derivanti dai processi di trasformazione delle istituzioni pubbliche di assistenza o beneficenza.
Having said this, it is first of all necessary to take into consideration article 2359 of the civil code, according to which the situation of control in the corporate sphere can occur in the following situations: a) it can derive from a majority shareholding in the capital of a company, such to determine the availability of the majority of votes exercisable in the ordinary shareholders' meeting (so-called "internal control by right"); b) may derive from a minority shareholding, which however, due to the presence of shares without voting rights or the widespread absenteeism of the other shareholders, allows one's will to prevail in the ordinary shareholders' meeting and therefore to impress, through the appointment of directors and statutory auditors, the administrative address of the company: this would determine an availability of sufficient votes in any case to exercise a dominant influence in the same ordinary shareholders' meeting (so-called "de facto internal control"); c) may also derive from particular contractual obligations which allow a subject to exercise a dominant influence over the company (so-called "de facto external control").
It is clear that the situation of control cannot be investigated in Third sector entities with reference to the extent of participation in the capital. The existence of control, however, could be verified with reference to the effect that the majority shareholding determines in the entities (e.g. the availability of the majority of votes exercisable in the decision-making bodies of the entity). In other words, "de jure" control can occur where the deed of incorporation and the articles of association reserve the majority of the votes exercisable in the assembly body, of direction or in the administrative body.
A hypothesis of control can also arise "de facto": in this case it does not necessarily emerge from an examination of the deed of incorporation or of the articles of association but can result from situations objectively verifiable in the light of the circumstances of the concrete case, for example, from an examination of the resolutions of the bodies capable of directing the activity of the entity, with particular reference to the administrative ones. Any "external control" could similarly result in the event that the existence of special agreements of a contractual nature emerges between two or more entities, of which the one (or those) belonging to the excluded categories, is placed in a condition, by of these agreements, to exercise a dominant influence over the other, determining the management guidelines.
Considerazioni simili possono essere effettuate con riferimento alle ipotesi di “direzione e coordinamento”. Le disposizioni del codice civile non contengono una specifica nozione di attività di direzione e coordinamento, che può essere identificata come un’attività di “gestione unitaria” o “direzione unitaria”, intesa come elemento qualificante un gruppo di enti, che deve essere valutata in concreto, sulla base di elementi suscettibili di indicare un’effettiva influenza sulla gestione dell’ente da parte del soggetto “escluso”.
Some potential indicators of a similar "hetero-management" could be inferred from the existence of one of the situations to which the law reconnects a presumption in terms of management and coordination activities. On this point, it should be remembered, in particular, that pursuant to art. 2497-sexies of the civil code, it is presumed, unless proven otherwise, that the management and coordination of companies is exercised by the company or entity required to consolidate their financial statements, or which in any case controls them pursuant to the aforementioned article 2359 of the Civil Code.
As far as SOCIAL ENTERPRISES are concerned, the specific regulation applies.
The art. 1, paragraph 2, of Legislative Decree no. 112/2017 provides that "companies established by a single shareholder, the public administrations referred to in article 1, paragraph 2, of the legislative decree 30 March 2001, n. 165, and subsequent amendments, and entities whose articles of association limit, even indirectly, the provision of goods and services in favor of members or associates only".
Furthermore, pursuant to art. 4, paragraph 3, "companies established by a single shareholder who is a natural person, profit-making entities and public administrations... cannot exercise management and coordination activities or hold, in any form, even analogous, joint or indirect, the control of a social enterprise pursuant to article 2359 of the civil code”.
Art. 7 of the same decree 112/2017 which, after reiterating in paragraph 1 that "The deed of incorporation or the statute may reserve the appointment of members of the corporate bodies to subjects external to the social enterprise", but "in any case, the appointment of the majority of the members of the administrative body is reserved to the assembly of associates or members of the social enterprise", establishes, in paragraph 2, that "Representatives of the entities referred to in article 4, paragraph 3".
An authentic interpretation of paragraph 2 and in particular of the term "representatives" can be found in the explanatory report to legislative decree n.112/2017, where they are defined as "subjects appointed by public administrations and profit-making entities". Therefore, the provision in question, in itself, does not prevent a person who assumes the chairmanship of the social enterprise from holding, at the same time, a position involving specific powers within the sphere of an excluded person, if the latter has no relationship with the 'social enterprise; but rather that the excluded subject identifies him and places him, within the administrative body as his own representative, if, even with a subsequent act, the individual in question assumes the position of president within this administrative body.
