Overview of the tax law decisions of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court published in the week of 28 January - 3 February 2019.

  • Judgment of 7 January 2019 (2C_222/2018): State and municipal taxes of the Canton of Aargau, tax period 2008; it was disputed whether the letter of a trust company addressed to the Cantonal Tax Office of Aargau and the related reply (both concerning the valuation of the shares held by the respondents in two companies controlled by them) are to be qualified as interrupting the limitation period for assessment; since the valuation of the shares of a joint-stock company is carried out independently of the shareholders' investment and the shareholders are not involved in the process of share valuation, they do not appear there either personally or through a representative; neither are they granted party rights; moreover, the defendants were not represented by the aforementioned trust company in their assessment proceedings for the 2008 cantonal and municipal taxes; the lower instance was therefore right to find that the assessment limitation period had expired with respect to the defendants for the 2008 cantonal and municipal taxes; dismissal of the appeal by the Cantonal Tax Office Aargau.
  • Judgment of 11 January 2019 (2C_769/2018): VAT (tax period 2013); it was disputed whether the requirement according to which service providers must have a "professional licence" in accordance with Art. 21(2)(3) VAT Act was fulfilled in the present case; on 25 September 2013, the Health Directorate of the Canton of Zurich granted the complainant authorisation to practise as a self-employed osteopath under the diploma awarded by the GDK; in accordance with the judgment 2C_476/2017 of 21 December 2009 in Case No. 2C_476/2017, the complainant was granted authorisation to practise as a self-employed osteopath under the diploma awarded by the GDK. Since the decision of the Federal Court of Justice of Switzerland of 25 August 2018, according to which it can remain open, with regard to the legislation of the Canton of Zurich, whether authorisations in the field of complementary medicine are classical professional licences or merely "title licences", but the decisive factor is that a cantonally regulated authorisation to practise the profession as an independent osteopath exists, the complainant in this case has the corresponding authorisation; the services are therefore to be paid from the 25th day after the end of the canton of Zurich. September 2013 exempt from tax under Art. 21(2)(3) VAT Act; acceptance of the complainant's appeal and referral to the FTA.
  • Judgment of 15 January 2019 (2C_643/2017): Real estate transfer tax (Valais); separation of a real estate company from an operating company (hotel operation); the qualification of the company in question as a real estate company and the subjection of its sale to the real estate transfer tax is not arbitrary; the fact that the same authority exempted the acquisition of the company from the authorisation requirement on the basis of the affirmation of a permanent establishment within the meaning of Art. 2, para. 2, lit. a FL does not change anything due to different approaches in the relevant legal provisions.

Non-occurrence decisions / inadmissible complaints:

Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.

‍

Tax topics covered in this post:
No items found.