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 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
The tax agency has increased compliance yield from wealthy individuals but cannot identify how much tax is paid by UK billionaires, the committee also claimed
Saffery cautioned that documentation requirements in new government proposals must be limited if medium-sized companies are not exempted from TP
The global minimum tax deal is not viable without US participation, Friedrich Merz has argued
Section 899 of the ‘one big beautiful’ bill would have spelled disaster for many international investors into the US, but following its shelving, attention turns to the fate of the OECD’s pillars
DLA Piper’s co-head of tax for the US and Latin America tells ITR about her fervent belief in equal access to the law, loving yoga, and paternal inspirations
Tax expert Craig Hillier agrees with the comparison of pillar two to using a sledgehammer to crack a nut
The amount is reported to be up 57% from the £5.6bn that the UK tax agency believes was underpaid in the previous year
Gift this article