Germany: Tax neutral cross-border downstream merger

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Germany: Tax neutral cross-border downstream merger

Linn-Alexander
Braun

Alexander Linn

Thorsten Braun

In a decision dated April 22 2016 (6 K 1947/14 K, G), the Tax Court of Duesseldorf ruled that in the course of a cross-border downstream merger, the shares in the surviving entity must be capitalised at book value.

In the case, a German resident GmbH (limited liability company) was merged cross-border into its wholly-owned subsidiary, a corporation resident in Luxembourg. The shareholder of the GmbH was resident in the US. The court had to decide whether the shares in the Luxembourg subsidiary would have to be capitalised at book value or at fair market value in the closing balance of the disappearing German GmbH. A capitalisation at fair market value would have resulted in the disclosure of built-in gains and an effective taxation of 5% of such gains.

In guidance issued on the matter, the fiscal authorities had said the shares should be capitalised at fair market value. The interpretation of the legal provisions by the tax authorities was mainly driven by the fact that the merger would result in a loss of German taxation rights.

However, the Tax Court of Duesseldorf (the Court) decided, in contradiction to this earlier opinion, deciding not only to capitalise the shares at book value, but also explicitly rejecting the interpretation as published in the decree on the tax implication of mergers (Umwandlungssteuererlass), issued by the German Federal Ministry of Finance on November 11 2009. The court stated that in a down-stream merger the shares in the surviving entity (the Luxembourg subsidiary) can be capitalised at their book value in the disappearing parent company. According to the court, the shares would neither directly nor in analogous interpretation qualify as passing over assets in the sense of Section 11 para 1, para 2, s1 of the German Transaction Tax Act. Instead, the shares would have to be valued separately according to Section 11 para 2, s2 of the Transaction Tax Act, and increased by any write-downs and deductions according to the applicable provisions in the Income Tax Act. In the case at hand, no write-downs or other deductions had been made.

The first instance decision by the court answers a heavily discussed question on the implication of cross-border downstream mergers. The Federal Tax Court will have the final word in its proceedings on an appeal pending under I R 31/16.

Alexander Linn (allinn@deloitte.de) and Thorsten Braun (tbraun@deloitte.de)

Deloitte

Tel: +49 89 29036 8558 and +49 69 75695 6444

Website: www.deloitte.de

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

But partners at the firm admit that jumping ship to the US would not be as easy as some believe
Governments are rewriting tax policy for the AI era, deploying digital taxes, tailored incentives and algorithmic enforcement that redefine where value is created
Wingrove will succeed Bill Thomas, who has served in the role since 2017; in other news, Andersen unveiled a sharp increase in revenues for 2025
Partners are divided on Italy vs PDM D’s analytical depth, evidentiary standards, and what the judgment signals for future intra-group financing cases
As GCCs increasingly become strategic hubs, multinationals face heightened risks around permanent establishment and place of effective management
While all options presented ‘drawbacks’, European Commission tax leader Wopke Hoekstra said the controversial US carve-out deal has ‘many benefits’
From tech preparations to competitiveness concerns, Tax Systems’ Russell Gammon addresses the most pressing client considerations arising from the SbS deal
Despite estimates that the US/OECD agreement will cost countries billions, the Fair Tax Foundation’s Paul Monaghan believes the deal is a ‘necessary evil’
The firm’s eye-catching UK launch is a major statement of intent, but it will face stern opposition in its quest to be the top global tax player
The postponement came after industry representatives flagged implementation issues with the registration regime; in other news, firms made key tax partner additions
Gift this article