Overview of the tax rulings of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court published between August 5 - 11, 2024:
- Judgment of June 24, 2024 (9C_267/2023): State and communal taxes (Valais) and direct federal tax 2015-2017; The dispute is whether the taxpayer was allowed to write off the loan granted to his father from the operating funds of his sole proprietorship and recognized there as business assets after the father's death as business-related. The lower court held that the loan granted was not attributable to self-employment in a technical and commercial capacity. On the other hand, it acknowledged that the tax authorities were in principle bound by their long-standing recognition of the qualification of the loan as business assets. However, a significant change occurred with the death of the father. The taxpayer and the brother did not waive the inheritance, but the brother was not in a position to repay the loan. The loan is therefore transferred in full to the taxpayer as a result of the inheritance and the taxpayer's joint and several liability. The taxpayer argues that there was no private withdrawal under either tax law or inheritance law. The lower court will have to examine the matter in accordance with the recitals. The taxpayer's appeal is upheld and the matter is referred back to the lower court for reassessment.
- Judgment of July 17, 2024 (9C_690/2022): State and municipal taxes 2014-2015 (Zurich); Intra-group loan interest; At issue was whether the lower court had determined the amount of monetary benefits from the appellant's loan interest to her mother in accordance with the law by relying on the maximum rates for real estate loans in the applicable FTA circulars. The Federal Supreme Court clarified that the "safe harbor" interest rates are no longer binding for the tax office if the taxpayer has disregarded them. In this case, there is no apparent reason why the tax authority should continue to be bound by the FTA circular and not be allowed to provide evidence of an interest rate in line with third-party comparisons and set an interest rate in line with the market that is below the maximum permissible "safe harbor" interest rate. Appeal of the tax administration upheld and referred back to the lower court.
- Judgment of July 18, 2024 (9C_15/2024): Tourist taxes of the municipality of Leukerbad/VS 2022 (1st quarter); The municipality of Leukerbad assessed A. AG in 2022 based on the municipal tourist tax regulations. In a letter dated the same day, it requested A. AG to disclose any counterclaims within 10 days. In the present case, it was not arbitrary for the lower courts to see the purpose of a settlement agreement as being solely to enable the complainant to offset any counterclaims. This possibility was granted to her in the present case after she was requested to state her counterclaims at the same time as the assessment order. The lower courts thus recognized without arbitrariness that the municipality had not made the assessment too early or was not obliged to issue a declaratory ruling prior to the assessment ruling. Dismissal of the taxpayers.
- Judgment of July 18, 2024 (9C_722/2023): State and municipal taxes 2020 (Zurich); The dispute in this case is whether the properties located in the canton of Thurgau and taxed there at market value are to be recorded at the income value or the market value at the main tax domicile in the canton of Zurich if the properties are considered to be used for agriculture or forestry under Zurich law (but not under Thurgau law). In order to transfer the debts and debt interest, it is necessary for the land to be recorded by both cantons according to a uniform valuation standard. The question of whether a property is used for agricultural or forestry purposes must be based on the qualification of the canton in which the property is located. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
- Judgment of July 25, 2024 (9C_110/2024): State and municipal taxes (Zurich) and direct federal tax 2020; Since the appellant, as a maintenance debtor, is not entitled to the child deduction within the meaning of Art. 35 para. 1 lit. a DBG, the direct federal tax is to be calculated according to the basic rate. Dismissal of the complainant's appeal.
Administrative Assistance:
- Judgmentof July 1, 2024 (2C_203/2023): Administrative assistance (DTA CH-DE); As a legal question of fundamental importance, the Federal Supreme Court dealt with the complainants' complaint that the request for administrative assistance sent by email had not been legally signed (no electronic signature) and therefore did not meet the legal requirement of being in writing. The Federal Supreme Court clarified that the term "in writing" in administrative assistance matters is not to be understood identically to the term "in writing" in the Swiss Code of Obligations. The form of transmission chosen by the requesting authority was not objectionable. Dismissal of the complainants' appeal.
- Judgment of July 1, 2024 (2C_761/2022): Administrative assistance (DTA CH-AT); The same legal question of fundamental importance arose as in the judgment of July 1, 2024 (2C_203/2023). See above; dismissal of the complainants' appeal.
Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.
