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 2026

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

Death, taxes and Deloitte hoovering up trophies at an ITR awards night. Isn’t that the saying?
AI, pillar two and joint audits could define the next era of tax controversy, says Baker McKenzie tax partner Ariane Calloud
Gregor McMillan of Howden explains how insurance-backed financing can help businesses and funds unlock liquidity from tax receivables and other contingent claims
The arrival of Alex Anderson swiftly follows that of funds tax specialist Stuart Alter and suggests the Tier 3-ranked firm has higher ambitions
One of the two appointments is EY’s Gordon McIntosh, who becomes the big four firm’s second senior tax departure in September
Balson's move from a Tier 1 practice to a Tier 3 competitor looks counterintuitive. The market data suggests it is anything but
Awards
It was another banner year for Deloitte, which picked up more awards than any other firm at a gala ceremony held at The Londoner in Leicester Square
The big four firm has been embroiled in a scandal over partners’ misuse of confidential board papers to pitch for and win corporate audits for Westpac and Dexus
Drawing on lessons from the PepsiCo case, tax lawyer Paul McNab explains why the ATO's latest royalty guidance should concern multinationals well beyond the technology sector
As pillar two exposes the limits of fragmented tax processes, organisations are rethinking their operating models to create the trusted data foundations that AI demands
Gift this article