Swiss-Italian travel agreement settles cross-border tax questions

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Swiss-Italian travel agreement settles cross-border tax questions

Sponsored by

Sponsored_Firms_deloitte.png
eric-prouzet-l-tsvvmplum-unsplash.jpg

David Wigersma and Giuseppe Sarno of Deloitte Switzerland explore how the governments of Switzerland and Italy have clarified the tax rules for cross-border workers affected by the coronavirus pandemic.

In July, Switzerland and Italy concluded a provisional mutual agreement, which settles the question of taxation of their respective cross-border workers* who are working from home. For the period from February until the end of June, and then to be renewable at the end of each month, cross-border commuters working from home will be deemed for tax purposes to have travelled physically to their usual place of work.



Due to travel restrictions by the Swiss and Italian governments, many cross-border workers who reside in Italy and work in Switzerland, or vice versa, have been unable to get to their ordinary place of work. This has raised the question whether this will result in a change in the tax regime applicable to them.



The agreement between Switzerland and Italy about cross-border workers who are forced to work from home due to the travel measures taken by the two governments, which applies on an exceptional and provisional basis, clarifies the tax situation. In substance, cross-border commuters working from home continue to benefit from the same tax treatment as if they had physically gone to their usual place of work. The same treatment also applies to the cross-border workers who have spent several consecutive days in their place of work without returning each day to their place of residence.



The provisions of this agreement have effect from February 24 2020 and up to and including June 30 2020. It is then renewable at the end of each month, and will eventually cease to have effect when the two states have ended their travel warnings and restrictions.  



This agreement reflects the recommendations made by the OECD and is a pragmatic approach,  which should reassure cross-border commuters and contribute to legal clarity.



*Cross-border workers are those who are resident in a municipality within 20 kilometres from the borders of Canton Ticino, Grisons and Valais, where the individuals commute to render their services.



David Wigersma

E: dwigersma@deloitte.ch



Giuseppe Sarno

E: gsarno@deloitte.ch



more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The UK Government’s plans to close the tax gap via increased HM Revenue and Customs investment have failed to impress local tax advisers
Under the merged scheme for R&D tax relief introduced last year, rules on contracted out R&D have changed. James Dudbridge argues for a proactive approach when reviewing companies’ commercial arrangements
Cultural nuances could account for tax advisers’ perceived poor cost management, a local partner told ITR
Updated rules represent a significant shift in the Luxembourg TP landscape and emphasise the need for robust arm’s-length calculations, says Vanessa Ramos Ferrin of TransFair Pricing Solutions
KPMG Law US revolves around contract managed services and the US is the largest market for that, Stuart Bedford tells ITR in an exclusive interview
The US law firm’s tax counsel tells ITR about inspirations from a ‘legendary’ German tax scholar, perfecting riesling wine and what makes tax cool
Wopke Hoekstra also swore the EU would ‘hit back harder’ if faced with a trade war; in other news, a UK watchdog has launched an investigation into an audit completed by MHA
Other reasons included the complexity of reporting, resource constraints and interactions with tax administrations
Despite this boost for investors, the OECD also said that extensive reliance on income-based instruments across economies is concerning
A recent UK First-tier Tribunal decision highlights the broad application of an anti-avoidance rule to deny tax relief, say Robert Waterson and Matthew Cummings of Eversheds Sutherland
Gift this article