Overview of the tax law decisions of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court published in the week of 19 - 25 October 2020.

  • Judgment of 20 August 2020 (2C_522/2019) for publication in the Official Journal: State and municipal taxes from 1 June 2010 (Zurich) and 1 June 2010-31 May 2013 (Zug); the dispute is whether the change of domicile of A. AG in 2010 led to a new main tax domicile. In 2010, A. AG sold the source code of a software developed by it - which represented the only substantial asset of A. AG - to G. AG. The existing lease agreement was also terminated and the three employees, who were also major shareholders and some members of the Board of Directors, left the company. Months before the transfer of the company's registered office to Zug, it was already clear that the purpose was only to liquidate the main part of its assets. The related activities had no significant connection to the new canton of domicile. It is the view of the lower court that the main tax domicile remained in Zurich. The assessment orders of the Canton of Zug are to be revoked and the tax contributions already paid are to be refunded. This despite the fact that the expert tax representative should have been aware of this, as no breach of trust can be deduced from this. Rejection of the complaint against the Canton of Zurich, approval of the complaint against the Canton of Zug.
  • Judgment of 7 October 2020 (2C_818/2020): Direct federal tax and state and municipal taxes 2018 (Solothurn); administrative fines for failure to submit a tax return despite reminder; the burden of proof for submitting the tax return lies with the taxpayer; dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal.
  • Judgment of 6. October 2020 (2C_85/2020): Security Deposit Direct Federal Tax and State and Municipal Taxes 2004-2014 (Geneva); Although the risk of moving abroad is unlikely in view of his personal relations in Geneva, the taxpayer had close economic ties with the USA, in particular through trusts and shares in US real estate structures, and therefore the tax claims may be at risk; The limitation period for the direct federal tax 2004 does not have the consequence in the present case that the total amount appears to be manifestly excessive, since default interest must be added; dismissal of the taxpayer's complaint.

Non-entry decisions:

Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.

Tax topics covered in this post:
Income Tax
Treaties
Profit Tax
International Tax
Capital Tax