Switzerland: Why the Swiss Corporate Tax Reform III needs to be aligned with 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: Why the Swiss Corporate Tax Reform III needs to be aligned with BEPS

rudolf.jpg

zulauf.jpg

Hans Rudolf Habermache


René Zulauf

Switzerland's Corporate Tax Reform III (CTR III) not only intends to make the country even more competitive internationally as a location for multinationals, but signifies a commitment to introduce a tax system that is aligned with international standards and virtually "BEPS-proof". Under the proposed reform, likely by 2019 or 2020, all Swiss special corporate tax regimes will be replaced by other measures, such as a step up for tax purposes, a patent box, or notional interest deduction (NID) on equity. In addition, it is expected that most cantons will reduce their headline tax rates significantly. All of these measures combined should provide companies with low tax rates and planning security until 2029 or 2030, so for up to 15 years from now.

While CTR III should be attractive for most companies in the future, there are potential implications of the BEPS project in relation to CTR III that have to be considered now. For example, multinationals in Switzerland often operate under a principal business model and may be affected by the OECD move to attribute a higher share of profit to group entities operating under a limited function and risk profile (for example, toll manufacturing or commissionaire structures). Particularly, the recently published discussion draft on permanent establishment (PE) status avoidance may either require changes to the business model or the principal company may be challenged on the basis of having PEs in a number of countries.

While there are structuring options to mitigate the tax impact of such PEs, they may adversely affect the principal company tax status of a Swiss company, which will only be phased out in 2019 or 2020. Companies affected may seek advice on how to best mitigate the gap in timing between BEPS outcomes and CTR III implementation.

Hans Rudolf Habermacher (hhabermacher@deloitte.ch) and René Zulauf (rzulauf@deloitte.ch)

Deloitte

Tel: +41 58 279 6327 and +41 58 279 6359

Website: www.deloitte.ch

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Peru’s approach to TP is increasingly at odds with OECD-style profitability policies, exposing multinational groups to asymmetric tax adjustments
Hany Elnaggar examines how the region's legacy economic substance regimes and the OECD's pillar two framework are converging on the same underlying test
The deals for TP Accurate and Intra Pricing Solutions will enhance Alphatax’s ability to support clients with the full TP lifecycle, the tax tech provider claimed
The DS Advocates partner discusses career reinvention, tax disputes and why advisory and litigation experience should complement one another
Lindsay Clayton’s arrival at Baker McKenzie continues the firm’s storied pursuit of ex-US government lawyers, a strategy reinforced by robust World Tax rankings
Shared transaction semantics, governed data and reusable ERP design may prove the most significant benefits of the UK's move to Peppol
As pillar two reshapes global tax competition, the UK faces a crucial challenge: how to remain attractive to multinationals without sacrificing tax revenues
Pillar two may be raising less than expected, but professor René Matteotti says the regime is still changing multinational tax behaviour
Multinationals importing goods into Brazil may need to align TP files and customs documentation more closely as authorities gain new tools to challenge related-party transactions
The private equity-backed deal hands Grant Thornton immediate and impressive US scale, but World Tax data suggests the firm still has work to do to gain recognition
Gift this article