Germany: Remuneration of non-resident directors

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

Germany: Remuneration of non-resident directors

peitz.jpg

muscheites.jpg

Petra Peitz-Ziemann


Erik Muscheites

The finance ministry appears to have reconsidered its position on the taxation obligation of the remuneration paid to non-resident directors of German companies. Up to now, it has broadly taken the view that the individual was liable to German income tax on his receipt for work performed in Germany on company business, if he could be considered as part of the local company's organisation. The ministry has now redrafted its decree – though the text is not yet final – choosing a different expression to describe the foreign resident director's involvement with local management, integrated as opposed to bound in. Up to now, bound in was generally considered to exclude the foreign resident who held a directorship with the German company purely to enable him to supervise its activities, or to provide a back-up in the interests of keeping the company fully competent under company law in an emergency. The fear now is that the use of the term integrated without further definition may indicate a change in attitude to the effect that a directorship is a formal appointment subject to registration and the holder is therefore automatically part of local management by virtue of the office held.

Fortunately, the ministry's other main criterion continues to be the country in which the executive physically does the work. Thus a day spent abroad on German company business – whether in the director's home office, or in his office at group headquarters – will not generally be seen as a German taxable event, regardless of its relevance to an intra-group management charge. The same would also seem to apply to days spent in third countries, such as on a visit to a major export customer of the German subsidiary. This position follows, of course, from the dependent personal services clause in most of Germany's double tax treaties.

Petra Peitz-Ziemann (petra.peitz-ziemann@de.pwc.com)

Tel: +49 69 9585 6586

Erik Muscheites (erik.muscheites@de.pwc.com)

Tel: +49 69 9585 3628

PwC

Website: www.pwc.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The French administration has used AI to detect undeclared swimming pools and verandas but always includes a human in the loop, the AI in Tax Forum heard
The UK tax authority’s deputy director of large business also reassured taxpayers that HMRC will not ‘nitpick’ returns
Sucafina’s tax chief was speaking at the ITR Pillar 2 Forum in London alongside experts from HMRC and other organisations
India’s Supreme Court rattled cross‑border structuring with its Tiger Global ruling. Subsequent rule changes narrowed the impact, but significant risks around GAAR, substance and treaty access persist
The UK-based big four spin-off firm has hired Marc Lien, who declared that most AI in professional services today is ‘cosmetic’
Projected revenue losses and exemption requests are harming the project’s capability and viability
HMRC secured lengthy prison sentences in a major payroll VAT fraud case, while law firms announced tax promotions and hires
Significant changes include an update to profit markers and an alteration to how an ‘inbound distributor’ is defined
ITR sat down for a pre-event interview with Tim Zech, WTS Germany, and Jeff Soar, WTS UK, keynote speaker at next week’s ITR AI in Tax Forum 2026 in London
Brazil’s bid to seek US-style exemptions from pillar two is ‘highly advantageous’ for multinationals, ITR has also heard
Gift this article