Overview of the tax rulings of the Swiss Federal Administrative Court published between August 12 - 18, 2024:
- Judgment of July 30, 2024 (A-319/2024): Corporate levy for radio and television (RTVA); The complainant expresses its displeasure with the content of the radio and television program. However, only the VAT liability of the company concerned and the amount of its turnover in the tax period concluded in the previous calendar year are decisive for the obligation to pay the business levy as a tax or for its amount in accordance with Art. 34 MWSTG. Dismissal of the appeal insofar as it is upheld.
- Judgment of August 5, 2024 (A-2082/2024): Radio and television; household fee; decision of March 13, 2024; The household numbers are in principle suitable for proving residence in Switzerland, which means that the complainants were rightly subject to the radio and television fee. Dismissal of the appeal insofar as it can be upheld.
- Judgment of July 25, 2024 (A-830/2023): Import assessment of relocation goods (import tax, 2021); The appellant neither submitted the missing documents within the deadline set by the customs office in the provisional assessment nor requested an extension of the deadline before this deadline expired. The provisional assessment thus became definitive in accordance with the statutory provisions (Art. 39 para. 4 ZG). As a result of the definitive assessment, the possibility of importing the consignment into the customs territory as duty-free relocation goods (Art. 8 para. 2 let. c ZG), which could have been granted to the complainant if he had acted within the deadline, expired. As a result, the import tax claim arose and a refund of the import tax pursuant to Art. 59 para. 1 MWSTG cannot be claimed. Dismissal of the appeal.
- Judgment of July 22, 2024 (A-63/2023): Import tax; relocation goods; The stay pursuant to Art. 14 para. 5 sentence 2 ZV is to be understood to mean that this must have taken place "for at least one year in the customs territory of the foreign country" without interruption. As the appellant never stayed in a foreign customs country for at least 365 consecutive days, he does not meet the requirements of Art. 14 para. 5 ZV for duty-free importation of household effects in accordance with the assessment decision. Dismissal of the appeal.
- Ruling of August 5, 2024 (A-5811/2023): VAT (2017 to 2021); non-appeal; If the objection deadline is missed, the authority is obliged to issue a non-appeal decision. Non-acceptance of the taxpayer's appeal.
- Judgment of August 5, 2024 (A-252/2024): VAT, pony pre-kindergarten; In the present case, it must be examined whether the pony riding course offered by the appellant for children from the age of three with parental supervision constitutes an educational service within the meaning of Art. 21 para. 2 no. 11 let. a or b VAT Act. Due to the objectives of the offer with personality and character-building elements, an educational service (Art. 21 para. 2 no. 11 let. a MWSTG) can be considered here, as well as an educational service through teaching (Art. 21 para. 2 no. 11 let. a MWSTG) or through a course (Art. 21 para. 2 no. 11 let. b MWSTG). In the case of pony riding courses for children from the age of three accompanied by parents, the focus is on the experience and not on education in the form of personality or character development of the children due to the organization as a two-hour event at the weekend with pic-nic. As a result, there is neither an educational nor an upbringing service in accordance with Art. 21 para. 2 no. 11 MWSTG. Dismissal of the taxable person's appeal.
Updates:
- Judgment of November 17, 2023 (A-4116/2021): Customs tariff classification, inclusion in the publication, see our blog post of 10.12.2023.
- Judgment of October 18, 2023 (A-5555/2022): Remuneration interest on sales tax, inclusion in the publication, see our blog post from 29.10.2023.
- Judgment of February 1, 2024 (A-5711/2022): VAT; non-entrepreneurial area; determination of the input tax claim 2013-2018; in this decision, the FAC examines whether the appellant has a non-entrepreneurial area in addition to the entrepreneurial area. It is also disputed in the present case whether the press promotion contribution is a subsidy or a price reduction or fee reduction (according to the complainant). In the present case, the complainant provides the services in the non-profit sector without consideration. There is therefore no remuneration that could be offset against the complainant's services. It is therefore a non-entrepreneurial area. According to the judges, the two areas also have a certain degree of independence. This means that the input tax claimed by the appellant must be corrected insofar as it is used for goods or services outside of its business activities. In addition, the court addresses the question of whether the press subsidy is a subsidy or not. After interpreting the relevant provisions, the court comes to the conclusion that the press promotion contributions received by the appellant are a subsidy, which leads to a reduction in the input tax deduction. However, as the additional VAT claim for 2013 is time-barred, the appeal regarding the 2013 tax year is upheld, but otherwise dismissed. Decision confirmed by BGer.
Decisions in the area of administrative assistance (incl. updates/re-publication):
Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.
