In early September a building on Milan's corso Magenta was bought through an Article 7.2 securitisation. Introduced in 2019, the tool counted 67 vehicles and €3.8 billion by mid-2025. With bank credit more selective, pairing senior bank debt with partly paid junior notes is gaining ground.
On 4 September Bizzi & Partners announced the purchase of a mainly residential freestanding building on corso Magenta in Milan, alongside a foreign investor and an Italian family office. The parties used a securitisation under Article 7.2 of Law 130/1999, funded by a senior mortgage loan from a bank and partly paid junior asset-backed notes subscribed by the three partners, with Banca Finint as arranger and servicer.
Such deals were rare until recently. Article 7.2, introduced by the 2019 Growth Decree, extended securitisation from receivables to real estate. A special purpose vehicle buys the asset, manages it through a servicer and asset manager, and uses the proceeds exclusively to repay noteholders.
Recent growth in numbers
According to surveys presented by Zenith Global with SDA Bocconi and Deloitte, Article 7.2 real estate vehicles numbered 12 in 2021 and 47 in June 2024, worth €2.5 billion. By June 2025 there were 67, totalling €3.8 billion, with an average size of around €60 million, well suited to Italy's mid-sized deal flow.
Deloitte's survey of more than twenty Italian banks found only 40% had taken part in such deals, 57% among challenger banks against 31% for traditional lenders, while 63% expected significant growth.
Why sponsors choose it
Ring-fencing is the reason most often cited: assets and cash flows are segregated and answer only to noteholders and transaction costs.
Less visible, and often decisive in the numbers, is how partly paid notes work. Investors commit a total amount and fund it as needed, at acquisition and then during works, so capital does not sit idle and returns on money actually drawn improve. In a value-add project with two or three years of construction, the IRR effect shows.
Against an alternative fund, no asset management company is required, key decisions rest with noteholders and regulation is lighter. Against a plain company, annual running costs are higher, as Zenith itself acknowledged at an Assoimmobiliare event, while differences at entry and exit are minimal. The benefits emerge during management. The backdrop matters too: with the ECB tightening again, bank lending to real estate is more selective on leverage and tenor, and the structure pairs a cautious senior loan with private junior capital absorbing residual risk. Deloitte estimates an €86 billion funding gap in European commercial real estate, where banks still provide over 80% of lending.
Limits to keep in mind
Fixed costs make the tool unsuitable below certain sizes. Servicing is concentrated, with Zenith Global claiming over 60% market share in mid-2025. The notes are effectively illiquid. VAT recovery follows ordinary rules, including pro-rata where the vehicle also makes exempt supplies. No aggregate 2026 data are yet available.
Lawmakers keep widening the scope: the annual SME law passed in March 2026 extended Article 7.2 to unregistered movable assets.
A wrapper for club deals
Real estate securitisation now fills a precise space: mid-sized deals, a few investors with aligned horizons, a transformation project with staged capital needs and a bank willing to fund the senior tranche. There a fund is heavy and an ordinary company offers little protection. With costlier debt and warier banks, that space is likely to widen, and the corso Magenta template could become a recurring route for high-end residential redevelopment in Italy's largest cities.