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

In looking at the impact of taxation, money won't always be all there is to it
Australia’s Tax Practitioners Board is set to kick off 2026 with a new secretary to head the administrative side of its regulatory activities.
Ireland’s Department of Finance reported increased income tax, VAT and corporation tax receipts from 2024; in other news, it’s understood that HSBC has agreed to pay the French treasury to settle a tax investigation
The Australian Taxation Office believes the Swedish furniture company has used TP to evade paying tax it owes
Supermarket chain Morrisons is facing a £17 million ($23 million) tax bill; in other news, Donald Trump has cut proposed tariffs
The controversial deal will allow US-parented groups to be carved out from key aspects of pillar two
Awards
ITR invites tax firms, in-house teams, and tax professionals to make submissions for the 2027 World Tax rankings and the 2026 ITR Tax Awards globally
Pillar two was ‘weakened’ when it altered from a multinational convention agreement to simply national domestic law, Federico Bertocchi also argued
Imposing the tax on virtual assets is a measure that appears to have no legal, economic or statistical basis, one expert told ITR
The EU has seemingly capitulated to the US’s ‘side-by-side’ demands. This may be a win for the US, but the uncertainty has only just begun for pillar two
Gift this article