Overview of the tax rulings of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court published in the week of October 9 - 15, 2017.
- Judgment of 14 September 2017 (2C_752/2017): Connection fees (Solothurn); in connection with a partial revision of the regulations on property owner contributions and fees of the municipality of Lohn-Ammannsegg (SO), the decisive point in time for the realisation of the connection fees to the fresh water and waste water network was to be examined; In particular, the interpretation of the term "use of the development facility" was disputed; the lower instance took the view that the levy would only be realised with the abstract possibility of using the building for its intended purpose; as this is a legal question, the basis of which is to be found in the cantonal or cantonal law. Since this is a legal question whose basis is laid down in cantonal or communal law, the Federal Supreme Court's cognition is limited to the violation of federal law; the interpretation of the lower instance is not arbitrary and cannot be objected to from a constitutional point of view; dismissal of the appeal.
- Judgment of 5 September 2017 (2C_732/2016, 2C_733/2016): Direct Federal Tax and Income and Wealth Tax 2010 (Schwyz); a private withdrawal may also take place within the framework of the conversion of a sole proprietorship into a stock corporation if not all assets are covered by this conversion and instead are transferred from business assets to private assets; the lower instance took the view that the complainant had terminated his business activities as a sole proprietor at the end of 2010 and therefore assumed a tax-systematic realisation of hidden reserves; in practice, a profit withdrawal or In practice, however, a profit withdrawal or transfer of business assets to private assets can only be recognised at the point in time when the obligated party has clearly expressed to the authorities its intention to withdraw the object in question from the business assets (E. 2.2.1); a private withdrawal is not considered to be a private withdrawal if the obligor gives up his self-employment and notifies the tax authorities of this, but at the same time expressly declares that he still wishes to sell company assets in the course of liquidating the business (so-called delayed liquidation) or that he only wishes to lease the business temporarily (E. 2.2.2); an expression of intent on the part of the complainant, however, did not take place in the present case and, moreover, the accounting treatment is based on the fact that the self-employment had not yet been abandoned at the end of 2010; the offsetting made by the assessment authority with regard to the recovered depreciation and the capital gain was therefore not justified; approval of the complaints and referral to the tax administration of the Canton of Schwyz for a new assessment.
