Overview of tax law decisions of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court published between June 19 - 26, 2023:
- Judgment of May 25, 2023 (9C_694/2022): Accommodation fees of the municipality of Andermatt/UR 2018, 2019 and 2021; The complainant complains that the income from the so-called accommodation fee, which is levied by the municipality of Andermatt, is partly used for purposes other than intended. The complaint of the taxpayer proves to be manifestly unfounded and is dismissed.
- Judgment of 26 May 2023 (9C_251/2023): Cantonal and communal taxes 2014 (Aargau); A.A. worked in 2014 both as a self-employed lawyer and notary (sole proprietorship) and as an employed lawyer and notary at A. AG, which he owned. The scope of the business-related rental expenses for office premises in the sole proprietorship is disputed in the present case. The lower court supported the portion of the rental expenses (at the level of the sole proprietorship) that was not justified on business grounds, inter alia, on the grounds that the scope of the rental expenses recognized on business grounds depended on the (quantitative) ratio in which the rented premises had been used by the complainant during the relevant period for his activities as an independent lawyer (sole proprietorship) and for his activities in the service of the AG. The arguments of the complainants directed against this to overturn the assessment of evidence made all aim in vain and are obviously unfounded. The offsetting of CHF 30,000 in the taxable income of the complainant is not objectionable. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
- Judgment of 30 May 2023 (9C_738/2022): Direct Federal Tax and Cantonal and Municipal Taxes 2013 (St. Gallen); In dispute is whether the lower court was allowed to deviate from the income of CHF 300,000 declared in the accounts of B. AG and instead offset the amount forwarded to the complainant A. as income from self-employment. The complainant cannot show in what way the decision of the lower court should be unlawful. B. AG did not record any infrastructure and also no expenses in connection with the services provided by it to C. AG. On the other hand, A. had meetings with representatives of C. AG. Thus, it would be incorrect to attribute the fees paid for A.'s personal services to the Company rather than to him. After a tax office makes an offset as income from self-employment with the taxpayer in the assessment, the assessing authority must, in principle, ex officio estimate the AHV contributions and make a balance sheet correction. It is not evident whether the cantonal tax office St. Gallen has included an AHV provision in the present case. For the purpose of examining and, if necessary, making an AHV provision, the appeal is to be partially upheld and referred back to the Cantonal Tax Office. In all other respects, the appeal is dismissed.
- Judgment of 31 May 2023 (9C_139/2023): State and municipal taxes (St. Gallen), fair market value assessment; The landowner complains that the cantonal courts wrongly did not schedule an oral or public hearing and that the lower court insufficiently reviewed the valuation of his property. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
Non-occurrence / write-off:
Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.
