Overview of the tax rulings of the Swiss Federal Administrative Court published between December 9 - 15, 2024:
- Judgment of November 26, 2024 (A-556/2024): VAT Q1 2014 - Q4 2018; financial intermediation; input VAT deduction; The FTA rightly qualified the services provided by the taxable persons as exempt financial transactions pursuant to Art. 21 para. 2 no. 19 VAT Act and denied the right to deduct input VAT accordingly.
- Judgments of November 13 and 14, 2024(A-6130/2020; A-6146/2020; A-6335/2020; 6440/2020): Import tax; temporary admission; The subsequent recovery orders concerning the antiques in dispute are to be confirmed subject to certain corrections to the assessment basis. The appeals are predominantly dismissed.
Updates:
- Judgment of July 22, 2024 (A-620/2023): VAT; mixed use; input VAT corrections; In the present case, the so-called three-pot method
was applied. As the lower court used the documents submitted by the taxable persons as a basis for determining the input VAT deduction, the correction was calculated using objective criteria and a permissible allocation key, which is why the FAC denied an abuse of discretion and an arbitrary
calculation. Partial approval of the appeal due to the statute of limitations for the 2013 tax period. The FAC did not accept an appeal directed against this. - Judgment of February 15, 2024 (A-2528/2022): VAT; recipient of the service; The dispute concerned who was the recipient of the service in the case of charges levied in connection with the operation of an airport (either domestic handling agents or domestic and foreign airlines). Depending on how this question is answered, the place of supply is either in Switzerland (handling agents) or abroad (foreign airlines) or the supply is exempt from VAT (domestic airlines). Since the complainant had concluded the contracts regarding the BRTS (use of applications relating to passengers and baggage) and CUTE fees (use of applications and terminals) with the airlines, had then also invoiced them and the service on which the fee is based also primarily served them, the airlines are deemed to be the recipients of the service. In the case of EVA fees (energy and air conditioning supply for aircraft), the airlines are also deemed to be the recipients of the service, as the service directly benefits the airlines. In the case of GSA fees (use of baggage sorting system), the handling agents are the beneficiaries, as this corresponds to the majority of the written regulations and the use of the system primarily benefits the handling agents. Partial approval of the taxpayer's appeal. Decision partially confirmed by the BGer.
- Judgment of October 15, 2024 (A-3761/2021): Issue tax; The contribution of several participations to the taxpayer does not qualify as a quasi-merger due to the lack of a capital increase; it cannot be considered together with previous transactions and qualified as a transformation of a sole proprietorship; accordingly, there is no restructuring situation that would exempt the contribution from the issue tax. Nor can the taxpayer invoke the protection of legitimate expectations. The valuation of the contribution is also protected. Dismissal of the appeal. Decision appealed to the BGer.
- Judgment of October 18, 2024 (A-5658/2023): VAT (2014 to 2018); place of supply, input VAT correction; In the case of tax-exempt educational services for which no opt-out has been made, the place of supply is decisive for any right to deduct input VAT. In the case of online distance learning courses including live lessons, the place of supply is assumed to be the taxable person's registered office (in Switzerland), as this is where the (technical) coordination is carried out by the complainant. Dismissal of the taxpayer's appeal. Decision appealed to the BGer.
Administrative assistance (incl. updates):
Decisions are listed chronologically by publication date.
