Swiss-Italian travel agreement settles cross-border tax questions

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

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

Hotel La Tour had argued that VAT should be recoverable as a result of proceeds being used for a taxable business activity
Tax professionals are still going to be needed, but AI will make it easier for them than starting from zero, EY’s global tax disputes leader Luis Coronado tells ITR
AI and assisting clients with navigating global tax reform contributed to the uptick in turnover, the firm said
In a post on X, Scott Bessent urged dissenting countries to the US/OECD side-by-side arrangement to ‘join the consensus’ to get a deal over the line
A new transatlantic firm under the name of Winston Taylor is expected to go live in May 2026 with more than 1,400 lawyers and 20 offices
As ITR’s exclusive data uncovers in-house dissatisfaction with case management, advisers cite Italy’s arcane tax rules
The new guidance is not meant to reflect a substantial change to UK law, but the requirement that tax advice is ‘likely to be correct’ imposes unrealistic expectations
Taylor Wessing, whose most recent UK revenues were £283.7m, would become part of a £1.23bn firm post combination
China and a clutch of EU nations have voiced dissent after Estonia shot down the US side-by-side deal; in other news, HMRC has awarded companies contracts to help close the tax gap
An EY survey of almost 2,000 tax leaders also found that only 49% of respondents feel ‘highly prepared’ to manage an anticipated surge of disputes
Gift this article