Switzerland: Swiss views on BEPS

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: Swiss views on BEPS

habermacher.jpg

reese.jpg

Hans Rudolf Habermacher


Markus Reese

The BEPS initiative attracts the attention of Swiss tax executives. The main reason is the uncertainty around the final outcome of BEPS and its impact on the international tax environment. Other reasons are the tight timeline for the implementation of BEPS and the immediate need for actions to mitigate tax risk exposure through an alignment of tax and operational models. From a Swiss tax perspective the complexity of the planned changes under BEPS is even greater since the Swiss government is currently working on the so-called Corporate Tax Reform III (CTR III) which aims to secure and strengthen the tax competitiveness and attractiveness of Switzerland as an international location for corporations. CTR III will replace current tax privileges, such as holding, mixed and domiciliary company tax regimes in the coming years with other measures, such as a License Box regime and the introduction of a notional interest deduction, in addition to a broad based reduction of headline cantonal tax rates, which is currently being discussed.

Measures proposed as part of the BEPS initiative obviously need to be taken into consideration when drafting the CTR III. It is the ambition to align the Swiss tax law with the internationally acknowledged OECD principles, especially from a transfer pricing point of view. It will make it easier for taxpayers in the future to defend the transfer prices applied between foreign and Swiss group entities if the business models are carefully aligned to the parameters of BEPS and CTR III. For multinational corporations which can demonstrate sufficient economic substance in Switzerland in particular, Switzerland will remain a preferred location for headquarter, principal, IP and financing structures.

Since the BEPS initiative by the G20 and OECD is still ongoing, the anticipated changes under CTR III are still to be determined. We will be closely monitoring the developments and shall keep you updated.

Hans Rudolf Habermacher (hhabermacher@deloitte.ch)

Tel: +41 58 279 6327
Markus Reese (mreese@deloitte.ch)

Tel: +41 58 279 6306

Deloitte

Website: www.deloitte.ch

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The controversial deal will allow US-parented groups to be carved out from key aspects of pillar two
Awards
ITR invites tax firms, in-house teams, and tax professionals to make submissions for the 2027 World Tax rankings and the 2026 ITR Tax Awards globally
Pillar two was ‘weakened’ when it altered from a multinational convention agreement to simply national domestic law, Federico Bertocchi also argued
Imposing the tax on virtual assets is a measure that appears to have no legal, economic or statistical basis, one expert told ITR
The EU has seemingly capitulated to the US’s ‘side-by-side’ demands. This may be a win for the US, but the uncertainty has only just begun for pillar two
The £7.4m buyout marks MHA’s latest acquisition since listing on the London Stock Exchange earlier this year
ITR’s most prolific stories of the year charted public pillar two spats, the continued fallout from the PwC Australia tax leaks scandal, and a headline tax fraud trial
The climbdowns pave the way for a side-by-side deal to be concluded this week, as per the US Treasury secretary’s expectation; in other news, Taft added a 10-partner tax team
A vote to be held in 2026 could create Hogan Lovells Cadwalader, a $3.6bn giant with 3,100 lawyers across the Americas, EMEA and Asia Pacific
Foreign companies operating in Libya face source-based taxation even without a local presence. Multinationals must understand compliance obligations, withholding risks, and treaty relief to avoid costly surprises
Gift this article