Overview of the tax law decisions of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court published in the week of 8 - 14 March 2021.

  • Judgment of 2 February 2021 (2C_516/2020): State and municipal taxes and direct federal tax 2007- 2009 (St. Gallen); after-tax proceedings; after-tax proceedings were opened against the taxpayer on the basis of a report by the ASU concerning a third person and, as a result, after-tax was demanded. The evidence seized by the ASU in the criminal proceedings may in principle be used in the post-tax proceedings. Further collection of evidence is not mandatory. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
  • Judgment of 18 February 2021 (2C_892/2020): State and municipal taxes Zurich and direct federal tax 2009: interruption of the statute of limitations; The dispute in this case is whether a letter to an experienced tax representative merely with a tax number (with a dot missing between the numbers) and place, but without the name of the taxpayer, was sufficient. The requirements for a letter interrupting the statute of limitations are minimal; reliable identification was possible, so the formal requirements are met. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
  • Judgment of 26 February 2021 (2C_1010/2020): direct federal tax and cantonal and communal taxes 2016 and 2017 (Fribourg); At issue is whether the lower court was correct in finding that the taxpayers acted out of time in filing their appeal with the cantonal court on 10 June 2020. The appeal to the tax office was dismissed on 11 March 2020, but it was not served on the representative or the taxpayers. It was not until April 22, 2020 that the taxpayers received a copy. Upon the representative's written request, new objection decisions were served on him on May 11, 2020, dated May 07, 2020. The representative filed the appeal with the Cantonal Court under the title "Appeal against the decisions of May 10, 2020", but attached the decisions dated March 11, 2020. Under these circumstances, the representative should have inquired of his principals as to the date they received the rulings. Dismissal of the taxpayers' appeal.
  • Judgment of 25 February 2021 (2C_90/2020): Subsequent recovery of customs duties due to missing or inadequate proof of origin; the arguments of the taxpayers relate to a large extent to procedural aspects that are not to be taken into account by Switzerland as the importing state but by the respective exporting states, on whose information Switzerland must rely in principle due to the principle of trust under international law; dismissal of the appeal of the taxpayers (see our article of 9 February 2020).
  • Ruling of 17 February 2021 (2C_473/2020): Direct Federal Tax and Cantonal and Municipal Taxes 2014 (Zurich); The only disputed issue was the legal qualification of benefits from an annuity insurance contract, specifically: whether these benefits are subject to 40 percent taxation as life annuities pursuant to Art. 22 para. 3 DBG or cannot be subsumed under the concept of life annuities and accordingly only the income component of the benefits is subject to income tax. The benefits from the annuity insurance contract were qualified as life annuities due to the weighty aleatory character or the bearing of the longevity risk by the insurer. The violation of the ability-to-pay principle by taxing these benefits at 40 percent was denied, since the federal legislator had deliberately opted for the existing lump-sum solution with an income share of 40 percent, even if it can be assumed that this share has long been too high. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
  • Ruling of 19 February 2021 (2C_948/2020): Direct Federal Tax 2009 (St. Gallen); the acquisition of the motor scooter by the complainant in the 2009 financial year was recognised in profit or loss and the business use could not be proven. Consequently, there is an expense that is not justified for business purposes and which must be corrected for tax purposes (Art. 58 para. 1 lit. b and Art. 59 para. 1 DBG e contrario). Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
  • Judgment of 22 February 2021 (2C_68/2021): Inheritance and gift tax of the Canton of St. Gallen; valuation of real estate; in dispute and to be examined in the present case were, in particular, the origin and the amount of the valuation of the real estate in dispute. The taxpayer asserted a breach of official duties on the part of the land registry administrator. He complained that the land registry administrator had wrongly disclosed his knowledge of the purchase agreement (obligation transaction) of 30 December 2014 and had allowed it to be included in the valuation of 2 March 2015. The taxpayer also criticised this in light of the fact that the land register entry (disposal transaction) had only taken place on 20 January 2016. According to him, the Land Registry should have used his knowledge (of the purchase agreement of 30 December 2014 and in particular the purchase price) only after 20 January 2016, i.e. only after the execution of the disposal transaction. In the context of the revaluation, the Land Registry could not and was not allowed to withhold its knowledge of the purchase agreement of 30 December 2014. In compliance with the second factual variant of Art. 78 para. 1 lit. c StV/SG (valuation), it was required to immediately and spontaneously report the facts "which are decisive for the valuation according to the provisions of the law on the implementation of the property valuation" to the assessment authority. By virtue of cantonal law, the Land Registry was not only entitled, but obliged, to bring its knowledge in this regard to bear on the assessment. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.

Non-entry decisions:

Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.

Tax topics covered in this post:
Income Tax
Profit Tax
Inheritance Tax
Custom Duties