Switzerland: Federal Supreme Court rejects offshore financing of a Swiss real estate group

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

Switzerland: Federal Supreme Court rejects offshore financing of a Swiss real estate group

savoia.jpg

Reto Savoia

Sufficient substance in an offshore financing branch of a Swiss company is required so that the foreign branch qualifies as a foreign permanent establishment. In this case, an entirely Swiss-based real estate group managed its finance activities through a Cayman Islands branch of a Swiss finance company. While the finance company had no employees in Switzerland, the Cayman branch had four part-time employees working 20% each.

Based on a ruling with the cantonal tax authorities, the Cayman Island branch constituted a permanent establishment to which all income of the finance company would be allocated and exempt from the Swiss tax base.

The Swiss Federal Tax Administration decided that the ruling would no longer be valid for direct federal tax purposes and subsequently appealed the decision of the cantonal administrative court – which upheld the existence of a permanent establishment – before the Federal Supreme Court. On October 5 2012 the Federal Supreme Court denied the existence of a permanent establishment in the Cayman Islands and ruled that all income of the Cayman branch was taxable in Switzerland.

The decision by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court to tax all financing income in Switzerland and not in the Cayman branch was based on the grounds that the activities of the Cayman Islands branch did not rise to the level of a permanent establishment which would merit an income allocation to the Cayman branch. The court in particular highlighted the fact that although there were four part-time employees in the Cayman branch their total compensation amounted to only $50,000 a year, while they managed a loan portfolio of several hundred million dollars.

In view of the above court case it will be all the more important to make sure that there are sufficient activities and substance in a foreign financing branch so that it qualifies as a foreign permanent establishment.

Reto Savoia (rsavoia@deloitte.ch)

Deloitte

Tel: +41 (0)58 279 63 57

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

ITR’s data has highlighted the US firm’s ambition to become America’s ‘premier’ tax player via a concerted partner recruitment strategy
Jaap Zwaan’s arrival continues a recent streak of A&M Tax investing in the region; in other news, the US and Japan struck a deal that significantly lowered tariff rates
In a world where international tax concepts rely on human activity, Leonard Wagenaar poses existential questions about the future of such ideas when AI is ever-present
France v Axa provides a practical illustration of how the burden of proof is applied in TP matters under French law, ITR also heard
In an exclusive interview with ITR, Ian Gary calls for a central public CbCR database and bemoans the US’s lack of involvement in international tax transparency
Reckitt Benckiser is to divest its Essential Home business, which includes more than 70 brands, to private equity firm Advent International
In the first of a new series of weekly opinion pieces, ITR Editor Tom Baker reflects on the OECD’s attempts to sanitise the US’s brazen pillar two negotiations
The threat of 50% tariffs on Brazilian goods coincides with new Brazilian legal powers to adopt retaliatory economic measures, local experts tell ITR
The country’s chancellor appears to have backtracked from previous pillar two scepticism; in other news, Donald Trump threatened Russia with 100% tariffs
In its latest G20 update, the OECD also revealed tense discussions with the US where the ‘significant threat’ of Section 899 was highlighted
Gift this article