Overview of the tax rulings of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court published between February 10 - 16, 2025:
- Judgment of December 20, 2024 (9C_578/2024): VAT (2015 - 2019); A AG was unable to provide evidence of a supply of services abroad (place of destination principle) as the nature of the services to the foreign company B Ltd. was not sufficiently documented. Even if the proof had been successful, B Ltd was a passive investment company, which means that the place of supply is determined by the domicile of the beneficial owner (pass-through). Dismissal of the appeal by A Ltd.
- Judgment of January 24, 2025 (9C_650/2024): Direct federal tax and state and municipal taxes 2017 (Solothurn); revision; The main issue in dispute was whether the (lower) assessment of the secondary tax domicile can constitute a new fact or new evidence within the meaning of the revision provisions if the main tax domicile has assessed the tax factors higher on a discretionary basis. The Federal Supreme Court confirmed that a deviating legal assessment by another tax authority does not constitute new evidence within the meaning of the revision provisions. This also applies in particular if another canton has refunded taxes or set the rate-determining income lower. Furthermore, the numerous formal complaints were all unsuccessful. Dismissal of the taxpayer's lay appeal.
- Judgment of January 17, 2025 (9C_603/2024): Household fee pursuant to the RTVA (2023); The dispute is whether the Federal Administrative Court violated the law by not granting the complainants' request for an injunction, judging the inspection of April 12, 2023 to have been carried out lawfully and denying the complainants' claim for damages. The inspection was rightly carried out in the present case and the violation of the right to be heard in the proceedings before the court of first instance has been remedied. With regard to the claim for damages, there is no valid complaint. Dismissal of the appeal of the liable parties.
- Judgment of January 30, 2025 (9C_288/2024): Direct federal tax and state and municipal taxes 2010 - 2014 (St. Gallen); discretionary assessment; The dispute before the Federal Supreme Court is whether the St. Gallen tax office was right not to accept A.'s objections to the discretionary assessments. With his objection, A. has neither submitted any evidence nor designated any such evidence. He limited himself to describing the offsetting of the pecuniary benefits legally established for the companies as inadmissible in a sweeping manner. The obvious incorrectness of the discretionary assessments cannot be proven. Dismissal of the appeal of taxpayer A.
Non-occurrence:
Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.
