Correct, since "whom" is the objective case, which is used anytime it is a direct object, indirect object, or the object of a preposition.
Given how little it's used nowadays, one could make a fairly strong argument that "whom" is archaic and should not be used as the primary translation.
In 1978 the who–whom distinction was identified as having "slipped so badly that [it is] almost totally uninformative". According to the OED (2nd edition, 1989), whom is "no longer current in natural colloquial speech". Lasnik and Sobin argue that surviving occurrences of whom are not part of ordinary English grammar, but the result of extra-grammatical rules for producing "prestige" forms."
Yet, then I would say: "who" should be taken as right if written, but the boxes should have the more correct alternative, even if less used.
I wish they would stop using that tense. No one in English would ever say this.
How about: who are you inviting to dinner? Sounds natural to me and I'm fairly sure it works as the same tense.
In Italian, the present could be used for usual actions (e.g. "Chi inviti a cena quando organizzi questi eventi a casa tua?"), for something that is going on right now or in the immediate future (e.g. Chi inviti alla cena di stasera?). I don't feel it could be used for actions happened in the past.
Is this form used in the case where somebody has not been invited yet? Who "do" you invite only works if you are in the process of inviting.
I went with "who's invited to dinner?", and it was wrong. Using the present tense is really odd here.
In this exercise the proffered translations from the drop down menus, for "chi inviti" gives the choice of who or whom, and (you)invite. These options offer, in english, no indication as to when this invite is offered, or the gender or otherwise of the person being questioned. To mark any response which uses the past tense as incorrect is, in my view, wrong.