Overview of the tax law decisions of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court published in the week of 9 - 15 August 2021.

  • Judgment of 26 July 2021 (2C_954/2020): State and municipal taxes 2016-2017 (Geneva); The valuation of the shares held by the complainant lawyer in a law firm managed as a joint stock company is in dispute. The price of the shares is based on the articles of association, which provide for the purchase at the nominal value of CHF 100. This is far below the net asset value. The court confirmed the application of the practitioner's method to determine the value and held that the restriction on the disposal of the shares in the law firm was taken into account by the deduction of 30%. A contractual restriction on the right of disposal does not affect the return on the assets. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
  • Judgement of 27 July 2021 (2C_543/2021): Direct Federal Tax and State and Municipal Taxes 2011-2012 (Zurich); As an heir, the taxpayer was charged by the Zurich Cantonal Tax Office with back taxes for assets of the deceased that had not been taxed. The tax assessment authority did not respond to the objection raised against this due to the missed objection deadline. After the decision to object had been notified to the taxpayer by the post office for collection, the taxpayer had the retention period extended and finally collected the item from the post office counter over a month later. A further month later, the taxpayer lodged an appeal against the objection decision and a complaint with the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich, which did not hear the appeal due to the missed deadline for submission. With a timely appeal to the Federal Supreme Court, the taxpayer demanded the annulment of the contested decision. The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and held that registered letter post sent by an administrative authority that is not accepted or collected is deemed to have been delivered on the seventh day after the unsuccessful delivery attempt (so-called fiction of delivery). A retention order or a forwarding order issued to the post office for a certain period of time could not change this. In any case, however, it was a prerequisite that the addressee had to expect the mailing, which in the case of private individuals appeared to be reasonable for a period of up to one year since the last procedural act of the authority. The Federal Supreme Court counters the taxpayer's objection that it was not aware of the fiction of service with the principle that "ignorance does not protect". Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
  • Judgment of 28 July 2021 (2C_486/2021): Cantonal taxes and direct federal tax 2011 (Ticino); The lower court's assessment of the facts, with which it concluded that the 2011 tax period was time-barred, is not arbitrary. Dismissal of the appeal of the tax authority.
  • Ruling of 3 August 2021 (2C_330/2021): Direct federal tax and state and communal taxes 2016 et seq. (Valais); Determination of the tax domicile; Since the dispute concerns the inter-communal main tax domicile in the same canton, the direct federal tax is not affected by the ruling. The taxpayer is not entitled to an oral hearing. The tax domicile of the complainant is at the place with which he maintains the closest ties. In the present case, this is the municipality in which his employer from paid employment has its registered office and in which, in particular, his wife and children also reside. The appeal is inadmissible insofar as it concerns direct federal tax. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal in the matter of state and municipal taxes.

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

Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.

Tax topics covered in this post:
Wealth Tax
Income Tax
Withholding Tax
Other Taxes