GOLD AT THE CENTER OF THE NEW GLOBAL DEBATE

Back in 2013, in an article published on Alessandro Sicuro Comunication titled “The gold held by the Bank of Italy: who owns it?”
https://alessandrosicurocomunication.com/2013/01/09/loro-custodito-dalla-banca-ditalia-di-chi-e-2/ , I posed a question that at the time seemed peripheral, almost technical, but which today has forcefully returned to the center of public and institutional debate. Not due to ideological shifts, but to changes in the international and monetary context, which make that question no longer avoidable.

In recent years, gold has returned to a central position on the global stage. Central banks in numerous countries, with China at the forefront, have intensified their accumulation of the yellow metal as a means of protection and rebalancing during a period marked by geopolitical tensions, financial instability, and growing questions about the resilience of traditional assets. At the same time, a significant portion of large investors have reduced their exposure to more volatile markets, maintaining liquidity in anticipation of potential reversals, the timing and modalities of which no one can accurately predict.

It is in this context that the question of Italian gold resurfaces with greater insistence: not as a slogan, but as a structural problem that has never been definitively clarified.

The question is only apparently simple: who owns the gold reserves held by the Bank of Italy?

The issue concerns the ownership of reserves, not their management. The European Union treaties establish that reserve management is the responsibility of the national central banks, but they contain no explicit indication of the legal ownership of gold. This interpretative leeway, left open for decades, is one of the reasons why the issue cyclically resurfaces without ever reaching a definitive resolution.

In recent months, when presenting the budget bill, the government attempted to address this very point, proposing a provision clarifying that gold reserves are attributable to the Italian people. This formulation was subsequently revised, also following comments from the European Central Bank, which called for maintaining a clear distinction between ownership and the central bank’s operational independence.

It’s important to clarify an often misunderstood aspect: the Bank of Italy has not been a state entity in the strict sense for many decades. Its capital has historically been held by banks and institutional entities. The 2013 reform did not “privatize” gold or transfer rights to reserves, but rather focused exclusively on capital appreciation and the redefinition of shareholdings, setting stringent limits on their concentration. No regulatory step has ever granted shareholders any rights to gold reserves.

And it is precisely here that one of the most persistent misunderstandings arises: the idea that the mixed nature of Bankitalia’s capital automatically extends to gold ownership. This interpretation is not supported by either regulatory texts or comparative practice. In countries like France and Belgium, for example, state ownership of gold reserves is explicitly enshrined in law, without this ever calling into question the autonomy of their respective central banks.

Clarifying ownership of gold, however, does not mean making it available for current use. Gold reserves serve as a last resort, protecting the state’s solvency, not as an operational tool for the ordinary management of public finances. Only in the event of exceptional events, potentially threatening the overall stability of the system, could their use be theoretically envisaged.

Italy’s gold reserves are the fruit of a long historical journey. They derive from peaceful trade accumulations, voluntary donations from citizens at crucial moments, payments received for supplies during conflicts, and, above all, from the enormous trade surplus generated during the post-World War II economic miracle. Wealth, therefore, amassed through activities carried out in the collective interest and accumulated over time.

Italy today represents a unique case on the international scene: it is the only major nation to hold a significant portion of its gold in foreign vaults. This decision, made in a historical context profoundly different from the current one, is now being questioned not so much for ideological reasons as for a growing need for clarity, transparency, and symbolic coherence.

The question posed in 2013 thus remains intact in its essence. It does not concern the use of gold, but its definition. Establishing precisely who owns it means removing this heritage from ambiguous interpretations and instrumental readings, restoring it to a dimension of institutional clarity.

In an era when global monetary balances are being reconsidered and gold is once again becoming a point of reference, clarity is not a stance, but a form of protection. And it is perhaps precisely this continuity of questions, rather than the contingent answers, that measures the soundness of a reflection.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational and journalistic analysis purposes only. It does not constitute legal, financial, or institutional advice, nor does it express political judgments or suggest actionable guidelines. The information provided is based on public sources, official documents, and historical reconstructions, with the aim of promoting a clearer and more informed understanding of the topic discussed. For cultural purposes only.