Overview of the tax law decisions of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court published in the week of 7 - 13 August 2017.

  • Judgment of 19 July 2017 (2C_649/2017): Fees for company searches at the Federal Office for the Commercial Register (EHRA); elimination of the legal proposal; appeal against the decision of the Federal Administrative Court not to enter the appeal; appeal does not meet the statutory requirements for substantiation; the appeal will not be acted upon
  • Judgment of 25 July 2017 (2C_659/2017): Direct Federal Tax 2001-2002 and Cantonal and Municipal Taxes 2002 (Neuchâtel); the appellant did not raise any objections to the possible reasoning of the lower instance, which is why the appeal will not be upheld; even if the appeal were upheld and a letter from the appellant were to be taken into account, the appeal would have been dismissed because the appellant was aware of the assessments at the latest when the tax invoices were received and in the present case the deadline for lodging an appeal was missed; failure to uphold the appeal
  • Judgment of 21 July 2017 (2C_228/2017): Customs law; customs lien by confiscation; for lack of current interest in legal protection, the complaint is not upheld (see E. 1.5.2 in this case by confiscated vehicle).
  • Judgment of 21 July 2017 (2C_53/2017): Customs law; obligation to deliver the goods to the nearest customs office; levying of the heavy vehicle fee; the Federal Supreme Court upholds the decision of the Federal Administrative Court of 28 November 2016; the substantive subject matter of the dispute concerns the passage of an unoccupied border post and the levying of a heavy vehicle fee on the passing lorries; the Federal Administrative Court rightly found the alleged violation of Art. The Federal Administrative Court rightly denied the alleged violation of Article XIV of the Turin Agreement of 1816, which also means that complainant 1 does not have the right to pass through an unoccupied border post (despite the obligation to pay) (E. 7.5.4 in conjunction with E. 7.6); insofar as complainant 1 has to pass through border post H. and the question of the heavy vehicle fee arises at all (see E. 9.2.2), Article 9 of the UIAA is not violated. Dismissal of the complaint, insofar as it is upheld.

Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.

Tax topics covered in this post:
No items found.