Germany: German Federal Tax Court questions constitutionality of interest deduction limitation rule

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

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

Countries which care about fair taxation of tech multinationals and equitable global distribution of wealth should back the UN’s tax framework, writes economist Abdelmalek Riad
The cuts disproportionately affected staff in certain positions, the report also found; in other news, MHA announced the €24m acquisition of Baker Tilly South East Europe
The plan aims to improve the efficiency, transparency, and effectiveness of direct tax administration in India
Meanwhile, South Africa’s finance minister has accepted a court decision on suspending a VAT increase and US President Donald Trump mulls a 100% tariff on foreign films
Jaime Carey speaks about the benefits of his tax background, DEI values, the use of AI for a smarter legal practice, and other priorities that will define his presidency
Historically low levels of attrition over consecutive years made a ‘difficult decision’ necessary, PwC has reportedly said
WTS Global is also vetting new potential member firms in Algeria, Cote D’Ivoire and Benin, Kelly Mgbor tells ITR in an exclusive interview
The scope of qualifying pillar two tax credits could reportedly be broadened; in other news, hundreds of IRS appeals staff are to resign
For many taxpayers, the prospect of long-term certainty that a bilateral APA offers can override concerns about time, cost and confidentiality
Levine, who served under the Joe Biden administration, led the US’s negotiations on the OECD’s two-pillar solution
Gift this article