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 2025

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

Experts from law firm Kennedys outline the key tax disputes trends set to define 2026, ranging from increased enforcement to continued tariff drama and AI usage
They also warned against an ‘unnecessary duplication of efforts’ in UN tax convention negotiations; in other news, White & Case has hired Freshfields’ former French tax head
Awards
Submit your nominations to this year's WIBL EMEA Awards by 16 February 2026
Defending loss situations in TP is not about denying the existence of losses but about showing, through proactive measures, that the losses reflect genuine commercial realities
Further empowerment of HMRC enforcement has been praised, but the pre-Budget OBR leak was described as ‘shambolic’
Michel Braun of WTS Digital reviews ITR’s inaugural AI in tax event, and concludes that AI will enhance, not replace, the tax professional
The report is solid and balanced as it correctly underscores the ambitious institutional redesign that Brazil has undertaken in adopting a dual VAT model, experts tell ITR
The Brazilian law firm partner warns against going independent too early, considers the weight of political pressure, and tells ITR what makes tax cool
The lessons from Ireland are clear: selective, targeted, and credible fiscal incentives can unlock supply and investment
The ITR in-house award winner delves into his dramatic novelisation of tax transformation, and declares that 'tax doesn’t need AI right now'
Gift this article