Germany: Federal Constitutional Court finds change-in-ownership rules partially unconstitutional

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Germany: Federal Constitutional Court finds change-in-ownership rules partially unconstitutional

Court Hammer pixelbay free copyright thumb

Germany's Federal Constitutional Court has ruled that the German change-in-ownership rules relating to loss carryforwards partially infringe the constitution, and must be amended with retroactive effect.

Linn

Alexander Linn

Under the change-in-ownership rules that have applied from 2008, a direct or an indirect transfer of more than 25% (and up to 50%) of the shares of a company that has loss carryforwards results in a pro rata forfeiture of the tax loss and interest carryforwards; and a transfer of more than 50% of the shares results in a complete forfeiture of all available carryforwards. There are three exceptions to the loss forfeiture rules: the intragroup restructuring exception and the built-in-gains exception (which have applied since 2010), and the business continuation exception (introduced in 2016).

The case before the court involved a direct transfer of between 25% and 50% of a company's shares in a year where no exception applied, so the transfer resulted in a partial forfeiture of the taxpayer's tax loss carryforwards. The court concluded that the rules violate the constitutional principle that companies should be taxed on their financial performance. The legislative intent to prevent loss trafficking by using 'empty loss companies' may be an acceptable justification for an exception to this principle, but a partial forfeiture of loss carryforwards where there is a change in shareholders of between 25% and 50% is considered too broad and cannot be used to deem the taxpayer's behavior to be abusive. The court also clarified that the introduction of the intragroup restructuring and the built-in-gains exceptions to the change-in-ownership rules do not affect its analysis. However, the business continuation exception introduced from January 1 2016 potentially could change the analysis because, under this exception, the taxpayer may be permitted to demonstrate the lack of any abusive intent for the share transfer. The court, therefore, limited the scope of its decision to the period January 1 2008 through to December 31 2015.

The court did not opine on the constitutionality of the rule resulting in a full forfeiture of loss carryforwards following a transfer of more than 50% of the shares, so this decision will not affect those transfers. However, it should be noted that another case involving transfers of more than 50% is pending before the federal tax court.

The Constitutional Court has asked the German legislature to draft and implement an amended change-in-ownership rule that is in line with constitutional principles by December 31 2018, and that would apply retroactively from January 1 2008 through to December 31 2015. If the rules are not amended within this timeframe, the change-in-ownership rules for ownership transfers of between 25% and 50% of the shares in a company automatically will become void on January 1 2019 for the 2008-2015 period.

Taxpayers should ensure that tax assessment notices for the 2008-15 period that are not considered preliminary pending a decision of the Constitutional Court, should be kept open to be able to benefit from the court's decision.

Alexander Linn (allinn@deloitte.de)

Deloitte

Tel: +49 89 29036 8558

Website: www.deloitte.de

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

A lack of commitment from major jurisdictions and the associated compliance burden are obstacles facing the OECD initiative
Richard Gregg is no longer fit and proper to be a tax agent, said the TPB; in other news, MHA completed its acquisition of Baker Tilly South-East Europe
Recent Indian case law emphasises the importance of economic substance over mere legal form in evaluating tax implications, say authors from Khaitan & Co
PepsiCo was represented by PwC, while the ATO was advised by MinterEllison, an Australian-headquartered law firm
Three tax experts dissect the impact of a 30% tariff that has shaken up trade relations between South Africa and the US
Awards
ITR is delighted to reveal all the shortlisted nominees for the 2025 Americas Tax Awards
As we move into an era of ‘substance over form’, determining the fundamental nature of a particular instrument is key when evaluating the tax implications of selling hybrid securities
It stands in stark contrast to a mere 1% increase in firmwide revenue since last year
It follows a court case concerning a Freedom of Information request lodged by the founder of a software company
After years of deafening silence, the UK tax authority is taking overdue action against corporates that fail to prevent the facilitation of tax evasion
Gift this article