Overview of the tax rulings of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court published between August 18 - 24, 2025:
- Judgment of July 24, 2025 (9C_132/2025): Withholding tax 2012-2016; monetary payments from the appellant company to its shareholder as a result of unrecognized cash income and incorrectly recognized accounts receivable (hidden profit distribution). According to the Federal Supreme Court, the right to be heard in the case of a reformatio in peius is safeguarded if the taxpayer is informed of the items concerned and the amount of the intended changes; a detailed explanation of the intended offsetting is not necessary. Once the payment has become due and the withholding tax claim has arisen, this remains in place in accordance with Federal Supreme Court case law, even if the payment is subsequently reversed or modified. The conversion of the pecuniary benefit into a loan years later and against the background of an official audit therefore does not change the withholding tax liability. In the present case, the long duration of the proceedings did not justify waiving the charging of default interest - the complainant would have had the opportunity to settle the tax claim determined by the FTA without recognizing a legal obligation - in order to avoid interest consequences. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
- Judgment of August 04, 2025 (9C_674/2024): Geneva tourism promotion tax (2023-2024): The appellant company is active in the field of personal and property protection and was subject to the tourism promotion levy in the years concerned. This tax is levied on companies that benefit directly or indirectly from tourism. In her largely appellative complaint, the complainant was unable to demonstrate that she was not one of the companies that benefit directly or indirectly from tourism. Dismissal of the appeal by the taxpayer.
- Judgment of July 31, 2025 (9C_722/2024): Direct federal tax and state and municipal taxes Zurich (2020); deductible property (maintenance) costs; At issue here is which costs the appellant taxpayer can deduct from taxable income - in addition to the demolition costs - for the replacement construction of the recently acquired property in need of renovation. In accordance with federal law, the lower court ruled that the appellant could not deduct maintenance and repair costs or investments aimed at saving energy and protecting the environment in connection with the construction of the new replacement building. Dismissal of the appeal.
- Judgment of August 07, 2025 (9C_347/2024): Real estate gains tax 2017 (St. Gallen); tax deferral due to replacement purchase of a residential property pursuant to Art. 12 para. 3 let. e StHG; A acquired a property for CHF 780,000 in 1992. He lived in it from December 2016 to July 2017. He then moved to another municipality (V). The property subsequently stood empty until he sold it for CHF 1,200,000 in July 2020. He had already bought a new property in the municipality of V in February 2020. After completion of the construction in 2022, he lived in the new property. In contrast to the lower court, the FSC denied a tax deferral due to a replacement purchase. In order for a "sale of a permanently and exclusively owner-occupied residential property" within the meaning of Art. 12 para. 3 let. e StHG to be assumed, it was ultimately decisive that the period between the owner-occupation (as a residence) of the sold residential property and the replacement property was reasonable. This requirement was not met in the present case. Appeal by the cantonal tax administration upheld.
Non-occurrence:
Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.
