Switzerland: Impact of EU transparency directive on country-by-country reporting for Swiss businesses

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

Switzerland: Impact of EU transparency directive on country-by-country reporting for Swiss businesses

mcneil.jpg

drye.jpg

David McNeil


Sarah Drye

In April 2013, the Irish presidency of the EU secured agreement on a new accounting directive to increase the transparency of payments made to governments by European companies involved in extractive and forestry industries. The proposals will amend the Transparency Directive (2004/109/EC) to require country-by-country reporting on payments made to governments including, among others, taxes on profit, licence fees and royalties.

While EU directives are not directly applicable to Switzerland, they are often taken into account by Swiss lawmakers when considering changes to Swiss law. Existing transparency initiatives – including the Dodd-Frank Act and the voluntary Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) – have attracted interest in the Swiss Federal Parliament and debate has already begun on the introduction of equivalent laws in Switzerland, most recently in the form of a parliamentary motion proposed on June 11.

Of particular interest for Swiss businesses is the scope of the Swiss initiative, which could impact companies trading extracted natural resources as well as those involved in the primary extraction itself.

Regardless of the final scope of any Swiss legal obligation in this area, it is likely that the pressure to improve transparency around tax will be felt by a much wider population of businesses as politicians, non-government organisations and increasingly the wider media, turn the spotlight on the contribution of multinationals to the economies of the countries in which they operate.

Compliance with transparency initiatives will have wide implications for processes and systems, particularly for those multinational groups who decentralise responsibility for tax, as is common for Swiss-based organisations.

For certain businesses, the requirement to report more information on taxes is likely to become an obligation. For others, additional voluntary disclosure could be a strategic choice in demonstrating commitment to conducting their tax affairs in a socially responsible manner.

David McNeil (damcneil@deloitte.ch)

Tel: +41 (0)58 279 8193
Sarah Drye (sdrye@deloitte.ch)

Tel: +41 (0) 58 279 8091

Deloitte

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The climbdowns pave the way for a side-by-side deal to be concluded this week, as per the US Treasury secretary’s expectation; in other news, Taft added a 10-partner tax team
A vote to be held in 2026 could create Hogan Lovells Cadwalader, a $3.6bn giant with 3,100 lawyers across the Americas, EMEA and Asia Pacific
Foreign companies operating in Libya face source-based taxation even without a local presence. Multinationals must understand compliance obligations, withholding risks, and treaty relief to avoid costly surprises
Hotel La Tour had argued that VAT should be recoverable as a result of proceeds being used for a taxable business activity
Tax professionals are still going to be needed, but AI will make it easier than starting from zero, EY’s global tax disputes leader Luis Coronado tells ITR
AI and assisting clients with navigating global tax reform contributed to the uptick in turnover, the firm said
In a post on X, Scott Bessent urged dissenting countries to the US/OECD side-by-side arrangement to ‘join the consensus’ to get a deal over the line
A new transatlantic firm under the name of Winston Taylor is expected to go live in May 2026 with more than 1,400 lawyers and 20 offices
As ITR’s exclusive data uncovers in-house dissatisfaction with case management, advisers cite Italy’s arcane tax rules
The new guidance is not meant to reflect a substantial change to UK law, but the requirement that tax advice is ‘likely to be correct’ imposes unrealistic expectations
Gift this article