Switzerland: Swiss views on BEPS

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

Switzerland: Swiss views on BEPS

habermacher.jpg

reese.jpg

Hans Rudolf Habermacher


Markus Reese

The BEPS initiative attracts the attention of Swiss tax executives. The main reason is the uncertainty around the final outcome of BEPS and its impact on the international tax environment. Other reasons are the tight timeline for the implementation of BEPS and the immediate need for actions to mitigate tax risk exposure through an alignment of tax and operational models. From a Swiss tax perspective the complexity of the planned changes under BEPS is even greater since the Swiss government is currently working on the so-called Corporate Tax Reform III (CTR III) which aims to secure and strengthen the tax competitiveness and attractiveness of Switzerland as an international location for corporations. CTR III will replace current tax privileges, such as holding, mixed and domiciliary company tax regimes in the coming years with other measures, such as a License Box regime and the introduction of a notional interest deduction, in addition to a broad based reduction of headline cantonal tax rates, which is currently being discussed.

Measures proposed as part of the BEPS initiative obviously need to be taken into consideration when drafting the CTR III. It is the ambition to align the Swiss tax law with the internationally acknowledged OECD principles, especially from a transfer pricing point of view. It will make it easier for taxpayers in the future to defend the transfer prices applied between foreign and Swiss group entities if the business models are carefully aligned to the parameters of BEPS and CTR III. For multinational corporations which can demonstrate sufficient economic substance in Switzerland in particular, Switzerland will remain a preferred location for headquarter, principal, IP and financing structures.

Since the BEPS initiative by the G20 and OECD is still ongoing, the anticipated changes under CTR III are still to be determined. We will be closely monitoring the developments and shall keep you updated.

Hans Rudolf Habermacher (hhabermacher@deloitte.ch)

Tel: +41 58 279 6327
Markus Reese (mreese@deloitte.ch)

Tel: +41 58 279 6306

Deloitte

Website: www.deloitte.ch

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The UK advisory firm has seen its global revenues expand by £27.2m following its listing and acquisition of Baker Tilly South-East Europe
Tax-trained John Sams, previously the firm’s CFO and COO, was appointed after a rigorous process, KPMG said
From Mauritius substance rules to Kenyan SEP tax and South African anti-avoidance measures, businesses must navigate growing scrutiny of cross-border IP structures in Africa
ITR spoke to multinationals, advisers and software providers about a June 30 deadline defined by faulty portals, high compliance costs and hard lessons
After years of onerous pillar two prep, businesses will be galled in seeing tax revenues outweighed by compliance costs
Tax advisers should revisit India secondment arrangements after the EY US ruling strengthened the Centrica precedent and raised fresh withholding concerns
Despite the shortfall, effective tax rates of multinationals have seen a ‘statistically significant rise’
After joining Milbank from Akin Gump, the fund tax specialist discusses sponsor demand, practice building, and the tax challenges facing asset managers
Partner payouts could also be reduced by a fifth, it has been reported
There is no logical reason not to extend an exemption from EU CFC rules to multinationals headquartered in side-by-side jurisdictions, USCIB said
Gift this article