Germany: German Federal Tax Court questions constitutionality of interest deduction limitation rule

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: German Federal Tax Court questions constitutionality of interest deduction limitation rule

Linn
Braun

Alexander Linn

Thorsten Braun

Germany's Federal Tax Court (BFH) referred a case to the Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) on February 10 2016 requesting a ruling on whether the interest deduction limitation rule violates the constitution (case ref. I R 20/15).

Introduced as part of the 2008 corporate tax reform, the rule restricting the deduction of interest applies to both shareholder loans and bank loans (that is, loans from related and unrelated parties). The rule limits the deduction of net interest expense (interest expense exceeding interest income) to 30% of the tax EBITDA. There are very limited exceptions to the rule, and its basic features are reflected in the OECD's BEPS Action 4 ('Limiting Base Erosion Involving Interest Deductions and Other Financial Payments') and in the European Commission's draft proposal for an anti-avoidance directive (COM(2016) 26 final).

The BFH initially expressed its doubts about the constitutionality of the interest deduction limitation rule in a decision issued in 2013 (case ref. I B 85/13 dated December 18 2013). However, the final decision on the constitutionality of the measure must be made by the BVerfG. Until this question is decided – which likely will take a few years – the tax authorities can continue to disallow full interest deductions based on the existing rule. Therefore, tax assessments should be kept open. Although the tax authorities likely will continue to apply the rule, tax assessments may be issued on a preliminary basis that would keep assessments open until the BVerfG issues its decision.

Should the BVerfG rule in favour of the taxpayer, a tax refund would trigger interest at 6% per annum, with the interest period starting 15 months after the relevant fiscal year. However, if the BVerfG determines that the interest deduction limitation rule is in line with the constitution, any preliminary tax assessments would become final.

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

CIT base narrowing measures remain more prevalent than increased CIT rates, the report also highlighted
ITR's parent company, LBG, will acquire The Lawyer, a leading news, intelligence and data-driven insight provider for the legal industry, from Centaur Media
KPMG UK’s Graeme Webster and KPMG Meijburg & Co’s Eduard Sporken outline the 20-year evolution of MAPAs, with DEMPE analyses becoming more prevalent and MAPA requirements growing stricter
Rishi Joshi, of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, warns of potential judicial overreach as assets are recharacterised to bypass a legislative exclusion
Only 2% of in-house survey respondents said they were ‘heavy’ users of AI for TP, Aibidia’s report also found
There was a ‘deeply embedded culture within PwC that routinely disregarded formal confidentiality obligations,’ the chairman of Australia’s Tax Practitioners Board said
Jennifer Best was most recently the acting commissioner of the IRS’s large business and international division
Section 899’s exclusion from the One Big Beautiful Bill does not mean it has been nipped in the bud, Aruna Kalyanam also tells ITR
Thanks to operational slickness and sheer force of will, A&M Tax will continue hoovering up talent across the globe
Setu Kamal became the first practising barrister to be added to the UK’s tax avoidance promoter list; in other news, UHY expanded its network in Canada
Gift this article