Overview of the tax rulings of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court published between June 9 - 15, 2025:
- Judgment of May 09, 2025 (9C_655/2024): Direct federal tax and state and municipal taxes 2015-2016 (Zurich); the taxpaying spouses stated that they had been living separately since February 2015 (husband moved to Liechtenstein), which is why they were assessed separately for the 2015 and 2016 tax periods. After these assessments became legally binding, the tax office began to suspect that the alleged separation did not correspond to the actual circumstances - subsequent tax proceedings and fine proceedings for tax evasion were initiated. The Federal Supreme Court rejected the accusation of arbitrary assessment of evidence by the lower court with reference to the anticipated assessment of evidence. It was disputed and had to be examined whether the spouses were rightly denied separate taxation for spouses. According to case law, this requires cumulatively that 1) both spouses have their own residence or have separate residences, 2) the spouses have dissolved the marital union and 3) there is no longer a community of means for housing and living expenses. According to the Federal Supreme Court, the lower court was right to deny separate taxation of spouses - the husband had not credibly moved his residence to Liechtenstein and therefore the first condition already failed. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
- Judgment of May 14, 2025 (9C_529/2024): Municipal tax rates 2024 (Geneva); abstract normative review; At issue was whether the Administrative Court of the Canton of Geneva (Constitutional Chamber) was right not to hear the appeal regarding the abstract normative review of the State Council's approval decision on the 2024 municipal tax rates. The Administrative Court ruled that the approval decision did not constitute an admissible object of the abstract review of norms due to its lack of normative content. The appellant did not succeed in demonstrating an arbitrary application of the law by the lower court before the Federal Supreme Court. For the same reason that led to the lower court's decision not to intervene, the Federal Supreme Court also recognized that a direct challenge to the approval decision before the Federal Supreme Court would not have been possible (Art. 87 para. 1 BGG). Dismissal of the appeal.
- Judgment of May 22, 2025 (9C_155/2025): Direct federal tax and cantonal and communal taxes 2014 - 2020 (Geneva); the subject of the dispute in these proceedings is whether the lower court was right to decide that the taxpayer had limited tax liability in the Canton of Geneva with regard to his income from employment and that the discretionary assessments were therefore confirmed. However, the established facts show that the taxpayer exercised his gainful employment in the Canton of Geneva for more than 183 days per year during the disputed tax period. This means that the first condition under Art. 17 para. 2 lit. a DTA FR is not fulfilled. Consequently, Switzerland's right of taxation is not restricted by the agreement. The taxpayer's objection that he is not obliged to submit a tax return proves to be unfounded. Even if - as in the present case with the Delegation of the European Union - the employer is not obliged to pay withholding tax due to its special status (domiciled abroad) and does not comply with this obligation, the taxpayer must still declare and pay tax on their income in the proper manner. In such a case, the ordinary assessment procedure is the only possible instrument for tax collection. It should be clearly stated that the question of tax liability is independent of the method of tax collection (withholding tax vs. ordinary assessment). Dismissal of the appeal by taxpayer A.
Amortization:
Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.
