German Federal Fiscal Court decides on treatment of hybrid entities under the German-US double taxation treaty
International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

German Federal Fiscal Court decides on treatment of hybrid entities under the German-US double taxation treaty

Hybrid entities have long been a tool for corporate tax planning. While tax authorities have fought the use of such hybrid mismatches for tax planning purposes, national efforts to prevent the use of hybrid mismatches have not proven to be very efficient, explain Michael Graf and Timothy Santoli, of Dentons

In a decision dated June 26 2013 (Doc No I R 48/12), the German Federal Fiscal Court (FFC) was tasked with determining whether a hybrid entity (in this case a US S corporation, that is a pass-through for US tax purposes but not for German tax purposes), is considered a US resident under the German-US income tax treaty (the treaty). 

Article 10, paragraph 2 of the treaty provides in part that if a German company pays a dividend to a US resident, German withholding tax imposed on the receipt of such dividend shall not be more than 5% if the beneficial owner of the dividend is a company that directly owns at least 10% of the voting stock of the distributing company. Article 1, paragraph 7 generally states that if “an item of income, . . . derived by or through a person that is fiscally transparent” under US or German law, then “such item shall be derived by a resident of a State to the extent that the item is treated for the purposes of the taxation law of such State as the income, profit or gain of a resident.”

In the case, the S corporation’s shareholders were US residents and the S corporation was a 50% shareholder of a German company, which distributed the dividend. The FFC:

  • held that the S corporation was considered a US resident for purposes of the treaty; 

  • in interpreting article 1, paragraph 7 of the treaty, determined that the two references to “resident” did not necessarily imply the same resident; 

  • determined that the income may be considered derived by “a resident of a State” (here, the S corporation) so long as the income is treated by the US as “profit or gain of a resident” (that is, the shareholders of the S corporation); and

  • reasoned that, because, under US federal income tax law, income derived by an S corporation is “income, profit or gain” of its shareholders, such items of income derived by or through the S corporation should be considered derived by a US resident. 

Accordingly, the FFC held that the S corporation was a US resident for purposes of the treaty and, hence, entitled to the reduction of the withholding tax to 5%.

Against the background of decisions such as the above, one of the seven so-called BEPS 2014 deliverables of the OECD published on September 16 2014 addresses the tax treatment of hybrid mismatch arrangements. However, when implementing these OECD recommendations into national law, legislators need to consider that not every hybrid entity is used intentionally to avoid taxes.

Michael Graf (michael.graf@dentons.com) is a partner in the Frankfurt office; and 

Timothy Santoli (timothy.santoli@dentons.com) is a partner in the New York office of Dentons. 

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Experts from TP tech provider Aibidia also warned ITR that companies ignoring pillar two is a ‘huge issue’ and a ‘red flag’
Hanno Berger was originally handed an eight-year sentence over an estimated $11 billion tax fraud; while in other news, France calls for minimum tax on the super-rich
Amount B is meant to increase simplicity and reduce uncertainty, but US TP specialists claim it may lead to controversy
Tax Foundation economist Alan Cole also signalled that pillar two has a 'considerable chance' of failing
The Labour Party is working hard to convince business that it will bring stability to tax policy if it wins the next UK general election. But it will be impossible to avoid creating winners and losers
Burrowes had initially been parachuted into the role last summer to navigate the fallout from the firm’s tax leaks scandal
Barbara Voskamp is bullish on hiring local talent to boost DLA Piper’s Singapore practice, and argues that ‘big four’ accountants suffer from a stifled creativity
Chris Jordan also said that nations have a duty to scrutinise the partnership structures of major firms, while, in other news, a number of tax teams expanded their benches
KPMG has exclusive access to the tool for three years in the UK, giving it an edge over ‘big four’ rivals
But the US tax agency’s advice is consistent with OECD guidance and shouldn’t surprise anyone, other experts tell ITR
Gift this article