Switzerland: Federal Supreme Court rejects offshore financing of a Swiss real estate group

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: Federal Supreme Court rejects offshore financing of a Swiss real estate group

savoia.jpg

Reto Savoia

Sufficient substance in an offshore financing branch of a Swiss company is required so that the foreign branch qualifies as a foreign permanent establishment. In this case, an entirely Swiss-based real estate group managed its finance activities through a Cayman Islands branch of a Swiss finance company. While the finance company had no employees in Switzerland, the Cayman branch had four part-time employees working 20% each.

Based on a ruling with the cantonal tax authorities, the Cayman Island branch constituted a permanent establishment to which all income of the finance company would be allocated and exempt from the Swiss tax base.

The Swiss Federal Tax Administration decided that the ruling would no longer be valid for direct federal tax purposes and subsequently appealed the decision of the cantonal administrative court – which upheld the existence of a permanent establishment – before the Federal Supreme Court. On October 5 2012 the Federal Supreme Court denied the existence of a permanent establishment in the Cayman Islands and ruled that all income of the Cayman branch was taxable in Switzerland.

The decision by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court to tax all financing income in Switzerland and not in the Cayman branch was based on the grounds that the activities of the Cayman Islands branch did not rise to the level of a permanent establishment which would merit an income allocation to the Cayman branch. The court in particular highlighted the fact that although there were four part-time employees in the Cayman branch their total compensation amounted to only $50,000 a year, while they managed a loan portfolio of several hundred million dollars.

In view of the above court case it will be all the more important to make sure that there are sufficient activities and substance in a foreign financing branch so that it qualifies as a foreign permanent establishment.

Reto Savoia (rsavoia@deloitte.ch)

Deloitte

Tel: +41 (0)58 279 63 57

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

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
The UAE accounted for most Middle East promotions and new rankings, as A&M Tax, Baker McKenzie, Dhruva Consultants and DLA Piper breached the top tier
Spanish-headquartered multinationals lead on reporting quality, while US and Swiss groups lag in the Fair Tax Foundation’s expanded analysis
Former IRS commissioner Danny Werfel joins ITR for a must-listen conversation spanning his time leading the agency, his AI risk framework, and the future of the OECD
Gift this article