Decisions of the Swiss Federal Administrative Court (CW 4 - 2024)

Overview of the tax rulings of the Swiss Federal Administrative Court published between January 22 - 28, 2024:

Judgment of December 7, 2023 (A-2444/2023): Radio and television fee; household fee; The grounds for exemption from the household fee asserted on the basis of criticism of the content of SRG's reporting do not apply; the legal proposal against the debt collection was therefore lawfully removed. Dismissal of the appeal.
Judgment of December 1, 2023 (A-865/2021): Stamp duty; turnover tax (tax periods 2011 - 2016); In the present case, it was disputed whether the appellants are to be regarded as securities dealers within the meaning of Art. 13 para. 3 let. b no. 2, or possibly no. 1 StG. Complainant 1 trades with a larger group of persons, in particular within the A. Group, and generates profits, so that the criterion of commercial activity is fulfilled. Complainant 2 makes the share purchases mainly within a short period of time; however, this does not change the fact that she does so on a regular basis. The purchases and sales of shares for Complainant 2 represent a source of income. The requirement of commercial activity is therefore also fulfilled; dismissal of the appeal by the taxpayer.
Judgment of January 18, 2024 (A-2037/2022): VAT, VAT refund (2017); The appellant provided various services to an aircraft manager based abroad (so-called operator) on the basis of a flight support agreement. The FAC had to examine whether the appellant had provided a domestic supply excluding remuneration within the scope of this agreement (cf. Art. 151 para. 1 let. c VATO). According to the FAC, the services of the appellant are not - as claimed by the appellant - to be qualified as aircraft management. The place of supply is therefore not already abroad (place of recipient) on the basis of Art. 8 para. 1 MWSTG. Rather, it had provided support services to the operator, whereby the passenger ground transportation provided from the relevant consumer perspective of an aircraft owner had an independent purpose compared to aircraft management and therefore qualified as an independent service. As part of the transportation services were provided in Switzerland (Art. 8 para. 2 let. e MWSTG), the appellant was not entitled to a VAT refund. Dismissal of the appeal.
Judgment of January 6, 2024 (A-2036/2022): VAT, reimbursement of VAT (2017); It was disputed and to be examined whether the appellant provided a domestic supply excluding reimbursement with passenger ground transports (Art. 151 para. 1 let. c MWSTV). As in the FAC ruling A-2037/2022, the FAC also concluded here that passenger ground transportation services are independent services with an autonomous purpose for aircraft owners that do not share the fate of aircraft management services. As part of the transportation services were carried out in Switzerland (Art. 8 para. 2 let. e MWSTG), the appellant was therefore not entitled to a VAT refund. Dismissal of the appeal.

‍Amtshilfe(incl. updates/republications):

Update: