Germany: Repayment of nominal capital

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

Germany: Repayment of nominal capital

linn.jpg

braun.jpg

Alexander Linn


Thorsten Braun

For multinationals with profit-making German subsidiaries, withholding tax on dividends can be an issue when repatriating profits from Germany, especially considering Germany's complex anti-treaty shopping rules and this often leads to an investor not receiving full treaty or EU directive benefits. Thus, opportunities to transfer cash from German subsidiaries by other means than dividends have become a consideration. For tax purposes, a distribution would usually be treated as a dividend (triggering withholding tax) and not as a repayment of capital (sourced from the tax equity account) as long as a company has distributable profits (E&P). Broadly speaking, once a company has had a balance sheet profit in one year, it can no longer directly access the tax equity account and would be deemed to pay dividends until the distributable profits have been consumed.

In a recent decision (IR 31/13), Germany's Federal Tax Court confirmed that a repayment of nominal capital would be treated as a repayment of capital for tax purposes, regardless of the amount of distributable profits. The decision confirms that a repayment of nominal capital allows taxpayers to directly access the tax equity account, meaning that the distribution will be treated as a repayment of capital for tax purposes. In that respect, the court even confirmed that a reduction and repayment of nominal capital do not necessarily have to take place within the same year and do not necessarily have to be included in the same shareholder resolution; this is legally required only for German stock corporations (AG), but not for German limited companies (GmbH). If a reduction and repayment of nominal capital are sufficiently closely linked and it is possible to demonstrate that the distribution was sourced from the reduction of nominal capital (and not from other capital or profit reserves), it would not be considered a dividend for tax purposes.

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.com/de

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The new practice, which features former ‘big four’ experience, already has over 20 team members
Speakers from companies including Uber and Stripe told the inaugural AI in Tax Forum to brace for impending changes to how advisers work
Authors from Khaitan & Co dissect a ‘welcome’ ruling, which found that the mere existence of a tax benefit would not, by itself, warrant a principal purpose test
Over two-thirds of survey respondents back the continuation of the UK’s digital services tax, research commissioned by the Fair Tax Foundation also found
Given the US/G7 pillar two deal, the OECD is in danger of being replaced by the UN as the leading global tax reform forum
Cinven’s latest investment follows its acquisition of a stake in Grant Thornton UK in December; in other news, a barrister listed by HMRC as a tax avoidance promoter has alleged harassment
CIT base narrowing measures remain more prevalent than increased CIT rates, the report also highlighted
ITR's parent company, LBG, will acquire The Lawyer, a leading news, intelligence and data-driven insight provider for the legal industry, from Centaur Media
KPMG UK’s Graeme Webster and KPMG Meijburg & Co’s Eduard Sporken outline the 20-year evolution of MAPAs, with DEMPE analyses becoming more prevalent and MAPA requirements growing stricter
Rishi Joshi, of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, warns of potential judicial overreach as assets are recharacterised to bypass a legislative exclusion
Gift this article