Germany: Inter-corporate dividend withholding tax hinders free movement of 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 2026

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


Germany: Inter-corporate dividend withholding tax hinders free movement of capital

In a case brought by the European Commission (EC) (C-284/09 Commission v. Germany, judgment of October 20 2011), the European Court of Justice (ECJ) held that Germany’s withholding tax on dividends to other corporations is in breach of community law in that it discourages persons from abroad from investing in Germany.

Dividends paid by a German corporation are subject to a 26.375% withholding tax. On application, this can be reduced to the lower treaty level, or, as applicable, waived under the provisions transposing the EU parent/subsidiary directive. German resident corporations are exempt from corporation tax on their dividend income, but can claim, in their corporation tax returns, a full offset of the withholding tax deducted at source. If an excess remains, they receive a cash refund. A German company receiving a dividend from another German company is therefore never faced with a tax burden, whereas a foreign company receiving the same dividend would be if it does not qualify for parent/subsidiary directive or treaty exemption.

The EC sees this difference in treatment as a discriminatory restriction on the free movement of capital. The ECJ has now agreed, rejecting German government arguments in support of the discrimination (domestic and foreign investors are in different positions – the distinction is to maintain the coherence of the tax system – the credit of withholding tax is a matter for the state of residence) as unfounded. Given that the free movement of capital is the one EU fundamental freedom that does not generally stop at the outside border, it would seem at least possible that the judgment applies to corporate dividend income universally. Certainly, foreign companies that have suffered dividend withholding tax in the past, for which they did not receive a full home country credit, may now be able apply to Germany for a refund – at least within the statutory limitation period of usually four years.

The government has not yet commented on this decision in public. It will have to end the discrimination, but one possible way of doing this would be to abolish the corporation tax exemption for dividend income, at least from portfolio investments.

Dieter Endres (dieter.endres@de.pwc.com)

PwC

Tel: +49 69 9585 6459

Website: www.pwc.de

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

It was also a memorable night for Galicia, KPMG, Skadden and Pinheiro Neto, all of which scooped major awards at a gala ceremony in New York
The former Deloitte UK CEO earned a 45% raise in a year when 1,000 staff reportedly lost their jobs – and the pay gap is only getting bigger
In a seminal development for big law, the 95-year-old firm is set to cease operations after a series of high-profile partner departures
UK Chancellor John Healey extended a VAT cut, suspended tariffs, increased a bank surcharge and vowed to increase funding for HMRC
Kristine Riisberg warned that TP decisions can determine top-up tax exposure under pillar two, while global consensus over the rules remains unsettled
Both Germany’s NIS2 and the EU AI Act now determine whether a tax function can meet its obligations – and both can make management personally accountable
Originators, loan purchasers and securitisation vehicles may need to revisit servicing agreements and pricing after a key judgment narrowed the VAT credit management exemption
Opening doors for existing talent within Baker McKenzie and a desire for enhanced legal capabilities informed Ricardo Perera’s switch from KPMG
Boaz Goren’s move to the upstart PE-backed firm takes the number of senior UK tax professionals who have left EY this year to 13
The allegations against Deloitte Cyprus raise uncomfortable questions about how far the big four can distance themselves from misconduct at member firms
Gift this article