Overview of the tax law decisions of the Swiss Federal Administrative Court published in the week from 27 March to 2 April 2017.

  • Judgment of 15 March 2017 (A-4157/2016): Administrative assistance (DTA Switzerland - Spain); no infringement of the right to be heard as a result of blackening by the FTA to protect third party interests (E. 4.3.2); no acts punishable under Swiss law if it is alleged that Spanish law has been infringed (E. 3.4.2 in conjunction with 4.3.3 f.); tax residence need not be checked, even if it is disputed, as an economic link is sufficient (E 3.5.3.1 in conjunction with 4.3.4); complaint dismissed.
  • Judgement of 8 March 2017 (A-2838/2016): Administrative assistance (DTA Switzerland - Spain); with regard to tax avoidance and the interests of the persons concerned which merit protection, this decision is published in an abbreviated and anonymised version (page 2 above); partial approval of the appeal.
  • Judgment of 15 March 2017 (A-6102/2016): Administrative assistance (DTA Switzerland - Germany); request for administrative assistance by the Federal Central Tax Office of the Federal Republic of Germany (BZSt) as representative of the German Federal Ministry of Finance (BMF) to the FTA based on Art. 27 DBA Switzerland - Germany (DBA CH-DE) concerning a German taxpayer whose name is not known to the requesting authority and who can be identified via a numbered account at a Swiss financial institution known to and available to the requesting authority; request for administrative assistance concerning income tax and inheritance and gift tax from 1 January to 31 December 2011. 2011; material requirements for the provision of administrative assistance based on Art. 27 DTA CH-DE not met; no sufficient explanation of the complainant's unlimited or limited tax liability in Germany; probable relevance of the requested information not sufficiently substantiated in law due to a lack of sufficient indications of the complainant's tax connection points in the requesting state; no sufficient suspicious facts for a tax liability of the complainant in the requesting state; administrative assistance request not sufficiently substantiated in law (E 5.3); no administrative assistance is to be provided on the basis of Art. 27 DTA CH-DE; appeal upheld.
  • Judgment of 23 March 2017 (A-2924/2016): Customs; subsequent preferential clearance; principle that the customs declaration is immutable; failure to lodge a complaint; in the case of preferential clearance of the goods, the person required to make the declaration must request this accordingly in the customs declaration and submit the necessary accompanying documents; the assessment of the goods was rightly made without preferential clearance; the complaint proves to be unfounded (3.3)
  • Judgment of 21 March 2017 (A-581/2016): Assessment of VOC levies; the first instance of an application for rectification is the competent customs office; the direct forwarding to the customs district directorate and the loss of one instance does not lead to rejection in the present case, since the complainant's interest in an immediate judgment of the Federal Administrative Court must be given higher weight (E. 3.1); the quantity of VOCs assessed is based on an obvious mistake (E. 3.3.3); detailed recipes to prove a specific VOC content are usually indispensable; in the present case, however, the product specifications and product designations submitted on the customs declaration are sufficient as proof (E. 3.3.4.2); acceptance of the complaint.

Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.

Tax topics covered in this post:
No items found.