For editorial cut-off date, disclaimer, and notice of copyright see end of this article.
In December 2001, the German and Swiss negotiating teams reached agreement on changes to the tax treaty between Switzerland and Germany. The official protocol, dated 12 March 2002, has since been released. Certain changes are retroactive to 1 January 2002.
The primary changes are as follows:
No withholding tax
will be levied on dividends paid to a parent company in the other treaty state that holds a 20 % share in the distributing corporation. Furthermore, Switzerland is expected to implement an exemption procedure similar to that available in Germany to avoid the need to file for a refund. Dividends due for payment on or after 1 January 2002 by the terms of the shareholder resolution authorising the dividend should qualify for zero rate withholding retroactively once the amendments have entered into force. For constructive dividends, the date on which the constructive dividend diminishes the net assets of the corporation (Mittelabfluß) is controlling.
Shares held through partnerships
will also qualify for full relief from dividend withholding tax in the future. Previously, full relief was not available where a corporation in one treaty state held shares in a corporation in the other treaty state through an interposed partnership. There is still some uncertainty whether the new rules will apply to all partnerships or only to German and Swiss partnerships.
The limitations on benefits clause in Article 23 of the treaty will be abolished. Instead, treaty shopping will be addressed by applying the domestic law of the respective treaty states. This means that Switzerland will apply its anti-avoidance directive and Germany will apply § 42 AO (Tax Procedure Act) and § 50d (3) EStG (Income Tax Act – anti-treaty-shopping provision, former § 50d (1a) EStG). The new provisions apply the year after the effective date of the amendments (approx. 2003).
Exchange of information
between the tax authorities of the treaty states is significantly expanded in matters involving tax fraud. In case of tax crimes punishable by imprisonment – under the law of both countries – the tax authorities are entitled to request information and assistance similar to that previously reserved to the criminal investigative agencies. The new provisions require reasonable cause to suspect that a tax crime has been committed (konkreter Anfangsverdacht) and are limited to discovery of information regarding the act of tax evasion itself, as opposed to the subsequent use made of the proceeds of tax evasion (investment in Switzerland etc.). The new provisions apply for tax crimes committed the year after the effective date of the amendments (approx. 2003).
Editorial cut-off date: 20 March 2002
Disclaimer and notice of copyright
This article treats the subjects covered in condensed form. It is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter and should not be relied on as a basis for business decisions. Specialist advice must be sought with respect to your individual circumstances. KPMG Germany in particular insists that the tax law and other sources on which the article is based be consulted in the original, whether or not such sources are named in the article. Please note that the article is current only through its editorial cut-off date shown immediately above (not to be confused with the later date as of which the article was placed online – the date appearing at the article's outset). Related developments subsequent to the editorial cut-off are not necessarily reported on in later articles. Please note as well that later versions of this article or other articles on related topics may have since appeared on this database or elsewhere and should also be searched for and consulted. While KPMG Germany's articles are carefully reviewed, it can accept no responsibility in the event of any inaccuracy or omission. Any claims nevertheless raised against KPMG Germany on the basis of this article are subject to German substantive law and, to the extent permissible thereunder, to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts in Frankfurt am Main, Germany. This article is the intellectual property of KPMG Germany (KPMG Deutsche Treuhand-Gesellschaft AG). No use of or quotation from the article is permitted without full attribution to KPMG Germany and the article's stated author(s), if any. Distribution to third persons is prohibited without the express written consent of KPMG Germany in advance.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Jonathan Sheehan gives an Irish perspective in the October 2016 edition of The American Lawyer on the European Commission's decision that Ireland granted undue tax benefits of up to EUR13 billion, plus interest, to Apple.
Three of my favourite topics feature in this issue of the Denton Briefing – tax, Bond and beer. But not necessarily in that order and not necessarily for the right reasons.
Some comments from our readers… “The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable” “I often find critical information not available elsewhere” “As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).