Switzerland: Spontaneous exchange of tax rulings

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Switzerland: Spontaneous exchange of tax rulings

schreiber.jpg

parmentier.jpg

René Schreiber


Veronique Parmentier

Could multinationals, in the future, see their Swiss tax rulings sent to foreign jurisdictions by the Swiss authorities? In 2013 Switzerland signed the Convention on Multilateral Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters (the Convention), which provides for spontaneous exchange of information. In January 2015 the Swiss Federal Council initiated a decree allowing ratification of the Convention and the amendment of the Swiss law on administrative assistance to introduce spontaneous exchange of information into domestic law. A draft decree was submitted to the parliament in June 2015 and first exchanges of information are expected as from January 1 2018. The question remains as to whether these exchanges will also include Swiss advanced tax rulings.

Article 7, paragraph 1 of the Convention lists the cases in which a jurisdiction should spontaneously transmit information to another jurisdiction. The OECD Manual on the implementation of exchange of information for tax purposes provides additional guidance regarding such circumstances. However, none of these documents refer explicitly to tax rulings.

The Swiss Federal Council will issue a decree providing more details regarding the obligations resulting from the Convention, and the tax authorities will issue some practical directives that will take into account the practice in other jurisdictions as well as international standards. Based on the current parliamentary work, this includes the framework being developed by the Forum on Harmful Tax Practices under the BEPS umbrella for the spontaneous exchange of tax rulings.

Therefore, it has to be expected that any tax ruling relating to a cross-border transaction involving movable income, which benefits from a preferential regime and a low effective rate of taxation, would fall under the scope of the new spontaneous exchange of information. It is, at this stage, less clear for other tax rulings. Many current tax rulings including the taxation of mixed companies, holding companies or principal structures will most likely fall into the first category.

René Schreiber (rschreiber@deloitte.ch) and Veronique Parmentier (vparmentier@deloitte.ch)

Deloitte

Tel: +41 58 279 7216 and +41 58 279 7856

Website: www.deloitte.ch

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

New research, which suggests LLMs can silently corrupt complex documents, should alert tax and legal teams relying on AI to handle iterative drafting and compliance workflows
Maintaining increased funding for HMRC is a ‘high possibility’ if he becomes PM, ITR has also heard
Awards
ITR is delighted to reveal all the shortlisted nominees for the 2026 Europe Tax Awards
The firm has hired a team of private client lawyers from Withers to launch in New York and Connecticut, though ITR analysis suggests it faces stiff competition
The ability of tax authorities to receive and analyse data is becoming ‘quite advanced’, warns Stuart Lang, head of EY’s compliance co-sourcing solution
The Court of Appeal ruling clarifies that treaty benefits are not abusive where transactions are commercially driven, providing greater certainty on “main purpose” anti-avoidance tests
Despite the Netherlands featuring an unusual concentration of World Tax-ranked technology-led providers, sources believe there’s a long way to go to challenge the established players
Ethics seems to be playing a subservient role to an entitlement culture borne out of a pervasive ‘revenue at all costs’ mentality at the big four
Historical World Tax data suggests the ‘largest law firm merger in history’ may not pose a serious threat to the world's leading tax practices
The repeal of Libya’s statute of limitations and tougher enforcement leave taxpayers navigating a high-stakes choice between conciliation and litigation
Gift this article