Overview of the tax law decisions of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court published in the week of 12 - 18 July 2021....

  • Judgment of 14 May 2021 (2C_181/2021): Kehrichtgebühr der Einwohnergemeinde Lohn-Ammannsegg 2019 (Solothurn); correction of the lower court's determination of the facts on the basis of a complaint or arbitrariness; according to communal law, the basic waste disposal fee is levied per household. The complainant (born 1928) still lived in her own flat in 2019, but no longer ran her own household. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Solothurn did not make any different findings of fact and based its reasoning essentially on the existence of two flats. It thus applied communal law arbitrarily. The taxpayer's appeal was upheld.
  • Judgments of 30 June 2021 (2C_719/2020, 2C_749/2020, 2C_754/2020, 2C_849/2020 and 2C_853/2020); Determination of the relevant value of the infrastructure of a medico-social facility with regard to the remuneration to be paid for the daily rent; In the present proceedings, it was examined whether unequal treatment between public and private medico-social facilities existed in the present case. The court concluded that there was no violation of the principle of equality of rights in the present case, as different types of establishments were treated differently. Dismissal of the complaints.
  • Judgment of 10 June 2021 (2D_45/2020): Direct federal tax and state and municipal taxes 2017 (Bern); Tax remission; In the present case, the lower courts did not apply a constitutionally untenable interpretation and application (arbitrariness) regarding the rejection of the tax remission application. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
  • Ruling of 11 May 2021 (2C_219/2021): Direct Federal Tax and State and Municipal Taxes (Bern), withholding tax 2009 and 2010; A. B., resident in Spain, provided services for the benefit of A. AG, resident in Switzerland, which A. AG booked under "franchise fees" as operating expenses. The cantonal tax administration of Berne qualified these "franchise fees" as income from employment and subjected A. B. to withholding tax in this respect. The complainant, A. AG, is unable to convincingly demonstrate that A. B. did not provide the services in Switzerland and that no withholding tax was therefore due. Furthermore, the complainant's objection that A. B. had returned the benefits to A. AG after the payment of the tax had been made does not change the case. AG after the tax consequences became known does not change the tax liability of the latter, as a mere mistake of motive when concluding the contract is irrelevant under tax law. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
  • Judgment of 29 June 2021 (2F_18/2021): Real estate gains tax: dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.

Decisions in the area of administrative assistance / non-admission:

Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.

Tax topics covered in this post:
Income Tax
Profit Tax
International Tax
Other Taxes
Property Gains Tax