Overview of the tax law decisions of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court published between 28 March - 3 April 2022:
- Judgment of 11 March 2022 (2C_667/2021): Direct Federal Tax and State and Municipal Taxes 2016 (Geneva); in dispute is the deductibility of the interest owed for the years 2010 to 2015 for the loans taken out by A. AG from its shareholders. The periodicity principle applies. The burden of proof for the existence of a condition precedent lies with A. AG. There was no evidence that the parties to the loan agreements had intended to make the principle of annual interest payments dependent on any uncertain future event. The obligation to pay the interest for the years 2010 to 2015 had therefore arisen at the end of each financial year. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
- Judgment of 28 February 2022 (2C_380/2021): Real estate gains tax of the Canton of Zurich 2012; tax deferral in the event of restructuring. In the present case, a pension fund transfers its entire real estate portfolio to an investment foundation. In return, it receives non-par value and irrevocable claims (book claim) to the corresponding investment group ("real estate asset swap"). Other cantons (BE, TG, FR, SG) approved the deferral of the real estate gains tax in a ruling, only the canton of Zurich assessed the real estate gains tax. The Tax Appeal Court and the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich approved the pension fund's appeal, whereupon the tax office of the City of Zurich filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court. In the present case, the (pension) purpose of the now indirectly held real estate remains fully intact. The original group of beneficiaries is also retained. The insured employees benefit from the real estate asset swap, which complies with the principles of the BVG (risk distribution, security, sufficient income). The conditions for tax deferral in the case of restructuring are therefore met. Dismissal of the tax office's appeal.
- Judgment of 11 March 2022 (2C_655/2021): Direct Federal Tax and State and Municipal Taxes 2016 (Valais); in dispute is whether the lump-sum benefit received by the taxpayer is subject to taxation under Art. 38 DBG. The lump-sum benefit was received with regard to the commencement of self-employment as an insurance broker. The taxpayer had her sole proprietorship entered in the commercial register, obtained a certificate as an insurance broker in 2015 and also registered with FINMA in 2016. In addition, she registered with the AHV and joined the accident and health insurance schemes. However, she never generated any turnover at all. The lack of turnover and the fact that a certain part of the pension money was used for the purchase of a property is an indication that the taxpayer did not take up self-employment due to the overall circumstances. Appeal of the tax office upheld.
- Judgment of 16 March 2022 (2C_178/2022): Cantonal and communal taxes 2010 and 2011; It is not objectionable that the lower instance did not hear the appeal due to the lack of timely payment of the advance on costs. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
Non-occurrence:
Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.
