Most businesses involving multiple individuals choose to adopt a corporate form. The most frequently used corporate forms are the company limited by shares (Aktiengesellschaft/AG, or société anonyme/SA) and the limited liability company (Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung/GmbH, or société à responsabilité limitée/Sàrl).

The company limited by shares is best suited for major businesses requiring a large amount of capital contribution. Its share capital must amount to at least CHF100,000. Meanwhile, the limited liability company requires a minimum share capital of CHF20,000 and is more suited to small and medium-sized businesses. Corporations are treated as separate legal entities, and are consequently taxed as such on their profits and their capital.

Transparent entities under Swiss law include the simple partnership (einfache Gesellschaft, or société simple), the general partnership (Kollektivgesellschaft, or société en nom collectif) and the less popular limited partnership (Kommanditgesellschaft, or société en commandite). Such partnerships are created for the sake of simplicity and flexibility.

Specific transparent entities exist under Swiss law for collective investment schemes – namely, the open-ended investment company (Investmentgesellschaft mit variablem Kapital, or société d’investissement à capital variable/SICAV) and the limited partnership for collective investment (Kommanditgesellschaft für kollektive Kapitalanlagen, or société en commandite de placements collectifs/SCPC). Transparent entities are taxed on their profits and on their capital in the hands of the partners.

Corporations are considered to be Swiss tax residents if their statutory seat or effective administration is in Switzerland. The statutory seat is determined by the place in which the company is registered. The effective place of management is determined following the Supreme Court’s case law and is considered to be where the company has its effective and economic centre of activity – ie, where its day-to-day management is conducted. Transparent entities are considered Swiss residents in so far as their partners are themselves residents in Switzerland.

The Confederation levies an annual corporate income tax on a corporation’s net profits. In addition, the canton and the commune in which a corporation is resident levy corporate income tax as well as capital tax.

The federal corporate income tax is levied at a flat rate of 8.5%. As taxes themselves are deductible in Switzerland, the effective tax rate on the federal level is 7.83%. The effective tax rate of the cantons and communes varies depending on the location.

Since 2020, the combined effective tax rates vary between 12% and 21%, with 14.79% being the average. The capital tax rate depends on the canton and commune of domicile but varies between 0.001% and 0.5%.

To comply with BEPS Pillar II, the Swiss Federal Council has enacted new legislation that is being gradually implemented since 2024 onwards. This legislation introduces a Qualified Domestic Minimum Top-Up Tax (QDMTT) for international corporate groups with an annual turnover exceeding EUR750 million. In instances where such a corporation is subject to tax rate below 15% under the ordinary cantonal and federal tax legislation, the discrepancy will be charged in the form of an additional federal top-up tax. Additionally, Switzerland has implemented the Income Inclusion Rule (IIR) as of 1 January 2025. The IIR provides that, in cases where the profits of a Swiss holding company’s foreign subsidiary are taxed at a rate of less than 15%, the difference is taxed in Switzerland in the hands of the holding company.

Akin to the ordinary federal direct tax, this top-up tax is levied by the cantons. The profits and capital of partnerships are taxed in the hands of the partners. Consequently, the tax rates are dependent on the individual tax rates of each partner. These tax rates vary according to their total income and wealth, as well as their place of residence.

Taxable profits are derived from the accounting profits, with the balance of the profit and loss account serving as the primary reference point. This tax base is subject to a few adjustments, specifically the following three:

• adjustments to ensure compliance with Swiss mandatory accounting rules;
• adjustments to ensure compliance with the periodicity principle; and
• adjustments aimed at preserving the system when Switzerland loses its taxing rights – for example, in the case of a transfer abroad.

Finally, corporations are taxed on their profits on an accruals basis.

Following the implementation of the corporate tax reform in 2020, a mandatory patent regime was introduced at the cantonal level, accompanied by optional R&D super-deductions. Specifically, the patent box regime entails the separate taxation of net profits from domestic and foreign patents along with analogous rights, with a maximum deduction of 90%. The deduction rate is subject to variation depending on the canton. The optional R&D super-deduction allows cantons to opt for the possibility of a maximum deduction of 50% on R&D personnel expenses, in addition to a flat rate surcharge of 35% on other costs and 80% of expenses on domestic R&D carried out by third parties or group companies.

Until 2020, other special tax incentives included a privileged regime of taxation for the profits of holding companies, domiciliary companies, mixed companies, principal companies and Swiss finance branches. However, the corporate tax reform in 2020 abolished such regimes: all companies are now subject to ordinary corporate income and capital tax. Among the measures taken in order to compensate for the loss of these tax privileges, most cantons have significantly lowered their tax rates.

Furthermore, the implementation of corporate tax reform has resulted in the confirmation of hidden reserves (including goodwill) by the tax authorities, coinciding with the transition from a privileged regime to standard taxation or migration to Switzerland. In the context of migration, a tax-neutral step-up in hidden reserves is applied in certain cantons during the transition phase, followed by a later tax-effective depreciation. Conversely, in other cantons, a two-rate system is implemented during the transition period.

Losses from the seven financial and tax years preceding the current tax period may be deducted to the extent that they could not be included in the computation of taxable net profit of those years. In December 2025, the Swiss Parliament passed an amendment to the law allowing losses to be carried forward for ten years instead of seven. This amendment may still be challenged by a popular referendum, but is otherwise expected to come into force from the 2028 tax year. Swiss tax law does not allow losses to be carried back.

Interest payments are treated as business expenses and are accordingly deductible from the corporation’s taxable income. Interest payments to related parties (shareholders or affiliates) must respect the fair market rate set out annually by the Federal Tax Administration. In addition, thin capitalisation limitations apply; the relevant debt-to-equity ratio depends on the class of assets (eg, 100% of cash, 85% of receivables, etc). A deviation from these safe harbour rates may be accepted if the company is able to prove that the rates used are at arm’s length.

It should be noted that Switzerland has not taken any measures to implement the recommendations of BEPS Action 4; see 9. BEPS for full details.

Swiss tax law does not entail any tax consolidation rules, and none are expected to be introduced in the near future. Each corporate entity is taxed independently. Consequently, each entity may deduct its own losses but, that said, losses cannot be transferred to another entity within the group.

Mergers and other transactions between two or more companies do lead to the consolidation of the tax base of the companies involved (including losses), but such reorganisations are disregarded if the only goal is to combine the tax base of the companies involved and to set off taxable profits against the losses of other companies.

Gains on the sale of assets (capital gains) are generally subject to income taxes at the federal, cantonal and communal levels. Two exceptions to the general rule exist:

• participation reduction; and
• the replacement of certain assets.

Moreover, depending on the canton and/or the commune, gains from the sale of real estate can be exempt from the cantonal and/or communal income taxes, but will be subject to cantonal and/or communal real estate gains taxes.

Participation Reduction

Companies holding at least 10% of the share capital of another company or the rights to at least 10% of the profits and reserves of another company, for at least one year, are entitled to a participation relief on the capital gains realised on the sale of such participation.

The corporate income taxes due are first calculated in the ordinary manner, and are then reduced by the ratio of net earnings on participations (gross earnings minus financial and administrative expenses) to the total net income. For example, if the net capital gains amount to 50% of the company’s total net income, corporate income taxes will be reduced by 50%.

Replacement Relief

The replacement relief further allows a company to defer the taxation of profits from the sale of fixed assets used in connection with its business if such profits are reinvested within a reasonable time in the replacement of fixed business assets located in Switzerland. Consequently, the corporate income taxation of unrealised gains can be deferred. This also applies to real estate if the legal requirements above are fulfilled. Thus, if participations are sold by a company and the proceeds of the sale are reinvested in other participations within a reasonable timeframe (ie, within one to three years), no corporate income taxes will be due on the unrealised gains.

Corporate income taxes on capital gains resulting from the sale of shares can be further minimised by using a holding company to acquire the shares. If this acquisition is financed with debt, no pushdown on the target company is possible, as each entity is considered separately under Swiss law. In addition, a merger between the holding company and the target company would be viewed as abusive. Therefore, the share price is generally kept as low as possible at acquisition (for example, by distributing dividends before the transaction or by reducing the capital of the target company).

Stamp Duty

Stamp duty is generally levied on shareholders’ contributions to a company and on the transfer of securities. However, some transactions are exempt, such as certain restructurings.

The Securities Issuance Stamp Tax is a stamp duty tax that is levied on the issuance (primary market) of certain Swiss securities (shares, similar participating rights, etc) and on equity contributions to such corporate entities. The taxable person is the company or the person issuing the securities or benefiting from the equity contribution. The tax rate is 1% of the capital contribution. It should be noted that capital created or increased by a corporation or a limited liability company (LLC) is exempt from the issuance stamp tax, up to the amount of CHF1 million.

The Securities Transfer Stamp Tax is levied on the transfer of certain Swiss and non-Swiss securities, if a Swiss stockbroker is involved as a party or an intermediary to the transaction. Stockbrokers are mainly banks, companies holding taxable securities with a book value above CHF10 million, etc. The tax rates applicable on the purchase price are 0.15% in respect of Swiss securities and 0.3% in respect of foreign securities.

Withholding Tax

A withholding tax (WHT) of 35% is levied on income derived from movable capital assets (ie, interest on bonds and dividend payments). The tax must be deducted by the debtor from the amount due to the recipient. In certain circumstances, a partial or total refund of the tax withheld can be obtained.

Charges and Fees

Certain transactions require a notarial deed, for which fees are payable (ie, the incorporation of a corporation or LLC, or the transfer of real estate). Land register charges are due upon selling, acquiring or transferring real estate located in Switzerland.              

Corporations are subject to capital tax, which is levied annually at the cantonal and communal level. The tax is based on the corporation net equity – ie, its paid-in capital, opened reserves and retained profits. The amount subject to tax may also be increased by the debt recharacterised as equity in the application of the Swiss thin capitalisation rules. The tax rate varies between 0.001% and 0.5% depending on the canton and the commune of domicile. Since 2020, the cantons have had the option to allow capital tax relief for equity relating to patents and similar rights, qualifying participations and intra-group loans. Most cantons allow for significant relief.

Excise taxes are also levied, including VAT on the supply of goods or services and the importation of goods or services. The standard rate has been set at 8.1% (previously 7.7%), the reduced rate (ie, for medicine, newspapers, books and food) at 2.6% (previously 2.5%) and the lodging services rate at 3.8% (previously 3.7%). Political discussions are currently under way to decide on a possible further increase in VAT to fund Switzerland’s military expenditure. However, no decision has been taken at this stage, and the legislative process will inevitably take several years before any changes to the legal framework come into force.

Depending on the canton, other taxes may also be payable. For example, certain cantons may levy tax on real estate situated on their territory.

Most closely held local businesses operate in a corporate form. Generally, only very small businesses operate in a non-corporate form.

Individual professionals are generally taxed as self-employed physical persons, on their income and wealth. The taxation of self-employed individuals is the same as that of salaried individuals.

However, they may also operate through an entity subject to corporate taxes, in which case the entity pays a salary and/or dividends to the individual, which are then taxed as income respectively as the wealth of the physical person. In such cases, the sum of the taxes paid by the entity and the taxes paid by the physical person on the dividends received amounts to a total rate similar to that which a self-employed individual would pay.

There are no rules to prevent closely held corporations from accumulating earnings for investment purposes, and particularly no dividend acceleration rules.

Income Tax

Swiss income tax is levied on any distribution of profits qualifying as a dividend and paid to individuals holding shares in closely held corporations. The tax is levied on the gross amount received. Individuals holding at least 10% of the nominal value of the share capital of a company may benefit from a reduced tax base.

Depending on the canton, individuals holding shares as private or business assets are only taxable on 50–80% of the dividend received, or 70% at the federal level if a shareholding threshold of at least 10% is met. If this threshold is not reached, individuals are taxed on the gross dividend payment.

The tax treatment of gains obtained on the sale of shares depends on whether the shares are held as a private asset or as a business asset. The capital gains earned from the sale of shares held as a private asset are exempt from taxation. Conversely, if the shares are held as a business asset or if the shareholder qualifies as a professional trader, the capital gains realised on the sale of the shares will be taxed as income.

The definition of a professional trader is not specified under Swiss law. The Swiss tax authorities must examine each case individually to assess whether someone qualifies as a professional trader, generally using the following criteria: the duration of the shareholding was less than one year, the frequency of transactions was high, it was necessary to obtain such gains to ensure a certain lifestyle, etc.

Swiss law provides other exceptions to the general principle of private capital gain exemption. In particular, income tax may be levied on the sale of shares by an individual where:

• the shareholder sells at least 20% of its shares to a company and the purchaser uses the assets of the purchased company to finance the sales price;
• the shareholder sells its shares to a company that is controlled by the same shareholder – such transaction qualifies as a taxable “transposition”; and
• a company purchases its own shares and the maximum percentages of ownership (10% or 20% under certain conditions) provided by Swiss corporate law are not observed, or the purchase is related to a capital reduction.

WHT

Dividend distributions made by Swiss corporations are subject to a 35% WHT irrespective of whether the recipient is a Swiss resident or not.

Swiss-resident recipients may obtain a full refund of the dividend WHT provided that they have accurately reported the gross amount of dividend received as taxable income and submitted a claim for the refund within a period of three years.

Non-resident recipients may apply for a full or partial refund of the dividend WHT, pursuant to the provisions of an applicable tax treaty. Otherwise, the tax is considered final.

Capital gains resulting from the sale of private shares by individuals are also exempt from Swiss WHT. If the qualification of an exempt capital gain is challenged by the Swiss tax authorities, a Swiss WHT of 35% may apply. As for dividends, a full or partial refund may be applicable.

Transaction Stamp Duty

A transaction stamp duty may be levied on the transfer of certain Swiss and non-Swiss securities – mainly shares or similar participation rights in corporate entities – if a Swiss security dealer is involved in the transaction. This duty is calculated at 0.15% on Swiss securities and 0.30% on non-Swiss securities sold/purchased during the year.

Individuals that receive dividends from publicly traded corporations are treated identically to those that receive dividends from closely held corporations for Swiss income tax, WHT and transaction stamp duty purposes. The reduced tax rate based on a 10% ownership (see 3.4 Taxation of Individuals on Shares in Closely Held Corporations) may be more difficult to reach from an income tax perspective.

WHT

Swiss WHT may be levied on the following:

• interest from bonds issued by a Swiss-resident issuer;
• dividends paid by a Swiss company to a foreign entity or investor; or
• interest paid to Swiss or foreign creditors on bonds or similar debt instruments issued by Swiss-resident issuers, such as loans.

However, Switzerland does not levy any WHT on interest from private and commercial loans (including intercompany loans).

WHT on interest is only levied for companies that qualify as being tax resident for WHT purposes. The application of the WHT only arises if the payment comes from a Swiss tax resident company; the residence of the creditor is irrelevant.

Moreover, profit distributions made by a Swiss corporation are subject to WHT (please see 3.4 Taxation of Individuals on Shares in Closely Held Corporations).

Furthermore, Switzerland does not levy WHT on royalties, whether they are paid to a resident or non-resident person. It should be noted that, if the royalties paid do not respect the “arm’s-length principle”, they can be requalified as hidden dividends if paid to a shareholder or a related party to the shareholder.

The Swiss WHT rate of 35% applies to such interest, dividends and other costs that are economically equivalent, or to hidden dividends. Without the application of an income tax treaty, such tax is considered final and no reimbursement is allowed by the Swiss tax authorities.

Tax at Source on Mortgage-Secured Loans

A tax at source may be levied on interest paid on a loan that is secured by Swiss real estate. Individuals who are not domiciled or resident in Switzerland for Swiss tax purposes are also subject to a specific WHT levied by the canton where the property is located, which may vary from 13% to 21%.

Foreign investors tend to use double tax treaties concluded with Switzerland where full tax relief can be granted. Such treaties include those concluded with France, Germany, the UK and the USA for the WHT paid on interest. However, most of the countries provide for a Swiss residual WHT ranging from 5% to 15%.

With regards to dividends, double tax treaties are usually used within the EU, and in particular Luxembourg, where investors can be granted full tax relief based on a 10% ownership.

In 1962, the Swiss Federal Council introduced a Decree imposing measures against the abusive use of double tax treaties concluded by Switzerland (ACF 62). This Decree implemented an internal anti-abuse clause to protect the tax substance of foreign states against the misuse of Swiss double tax agreements (DTAs), and contained a number of tests that had to be fulfilled by every Swiss-resident company in order to be eligible for treaty benefits. After the partial abrogation in 2017, the Federal Council decided in November 2021 to fully abrogate the ACF 62 on 1 January 2022.

In 2005, Switzerland enshrined the existence of an implicit and unwritten reservation of abuse in Swiss DTAs. Based on the articles of the Vienna Convention on Treaties, which provide that a treaty in force is binding on the parties and the parties must perform and interpret it in good faith, the Federal Supreme Court held that a general clause prohibiting abuse of the agreement existed, even in the absence of an explicit provision. This unwritten reservation thus allows the tax authorities of the source state to deny relief in situations that are qualified as abusive, even in the absence of an express clause in the treaty in question.

According to the Swiss tax authorities, a foreign entity claiming a refund of Swiss WHT must fulfil all the mandatory requirements. In particular, the tax authorities review whether the company requesting a refund is the real beneficiary of the income and is entitled to such refund. The tax administration also has an economic approach to the facts and reviews the structure to determine whether it has been arranged with the sole purpose of obtaining a full or partial refund of WHT. In such cases, a refund of the WHT may be denied by the Swiss tax authorities.

Swiss domestic law does not provide any specific transfer pricing rules or regulations. As such, Switzerland applies the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) guidelines to transfer pricing issues, and is participating in the Base Erosion and Profit-Shifting (BEPS) project.

There are no specific rules with respect to the use of related-party limited risk distribution arrangements in Swiss tax law. However, the Swiss tax authorities may review the structure with regards to safe harbour rules and the “arm’s length principle” to challenge an abusive use of such related-party limited risk distribution arrangements.

Switzerland applies the OECD standards for transfer pricing issues.

Until recently, few transfer pricing disputes were brought up by the Swiss tax authorities; in the last couple of years, however, an increasing number of cases have been taken up by the tax authorities for review of the appropriateness of the transfer pricing. Next to ordinary legal (court) proceedings, mutual agreement procedure (MAP) proceedings have accrued an increasing importance in this context. The traditional easy access to Swiss authorities also applies to MAP proceedings, which makes these proceedings an important add-on to ordinary – in-parallel – court proceedings in transfer pricing disputes. The latest statistics show that a MAP on transfer pricing negotiated with Swiss authorities takes an average of 20 months.

To avoid future transfer pricing disputes, bilateral and multilateral advance pricing agreement proceedings confirming a specific transfer pricing in advance by the countries involved are encouraged, again by easy access to such proceedings and the competent authorities.

Compensating adjustments are allowed when a transfer pricing claim is successfully settled. The State Secretariat for International Finance has published a specific form for MAPs in the case of transfer pricing, thereby facilitating MAPs in such cases.

Local branches and local subsidiaries of non-local corporations are taxed similarly in Switzerland for corporate income tax purposes. For WHT purposes, however, subsidiaries are subject to withholding obligations, while branches are not.

The capital gains of non-residents on the sale of stock in local corporations are not subject to tax in Switzerland, unless the gain is derived from the sale of a Swiss real estate company. If a double taxation treaty corresponding to the OECD Model Tax Convention applies in the case at hand, such real estate gain would typically only be taxable in Switzerland.

Switzerland has no global change-of-control provision for indirect holdings. A change of control in a non-local corporation may trigger taxes/duty charges exclusively for real estate companies. The specifics will depend on the canton’s legislation.

There are no specific formulas recommended by law nor in the administration’s published practice. Nevertheless, all transactions with a Swiss related entity must be carried out at arm’s length.

Deductions are allowed in Switzerland, including expenses paid to related parties, as long as such expenses are commercially justified.

Management and administrative services provided by a non-local affiliate to a Swiss company are often remunerated based on a cost-plus method in practice. As per this method, the costs incurred by the supplier of services to an affiliate enterprise serve as the basis for determining the income to be allocated to said service provider. An appropriate mark-up – typically oscillating between 5% and 15% – is then added to these costs, resulting in an appropriate profit in light of the functions performed and the market conditions.

Borrowings from a non-local affiliate by a Swiss foreign-owned affiliate must be remunerated by interest paid at an “arm’s length rate”, published yearly by the Federal Tax Administration. Such interest is typically not subject to Swiss WHT (35%), unless the loan is characterised as a bond.

Interest exceeding the “arm’s length rate” with no commercial justification is regarded as a hidden dividend and subject to WHT.

Corporations that are resident in Switzerland are subject to Swiss tax on an unlimited basis – ie, on their worldwide profits (including foreign income) and capital, except income that is attributed to a foreign permanent establishment or immovable property.

The expenses proportionally attributable to foreign income that is not subject to Swiss tax are not deductible in Switzerland. However, special rules apply with respect to the debt loss carry-over of foreign permanent establishments of local corporations.

The participation reduction regime applies at a federal and cantonal/communal level. Thus, the effective tax rate applicable to the dividends received is proportionately reduced according to the ratio of the net dividend income over the total net taxable income. This is subject to the condition that the Swiss company holds at least 10% of the participation or participation rights with a market value of at least CHF1 million. As a result, such dividend income is usually virtually tax-exempt.

The participation exemption applies regardless of whether the dividends are paid by a resident or by a non-resident company.

Switzerland has not yet introduced specific provisions with regard to the taxation of intangibles. The deriving incomes are therefore subject to profit taxes.

With the introduction of the corporate tax reform in 2020, a patent box with a maximum relief of 90% has been introduced at the cantonal level, with the cantons having the option to apply R&D super-deductions of up to 50% and a capital tax relief relating to patents and similar rights. The overall maximum tax relief is 70% (see 2.2 Technology Investments).

Switzerland does not have a controlled foreign corporation (CFC) regime. However, according to the case law of the Federal Supreme Court, the profits of companies that are formally domiciled abroad with little or no local substance but are effectively managed in Switzerland or have a permanent establishment in Switzerland may be subject to Swiss income tax.

To consider that a company is effectively managed in Switzerland, the local tax authorities follow a case-by-case approach, aimed at determining the location of the economic centre of the company’s existence. They weigh the different relevant factual elements, but the key element used to determine the location of the effective management is the place where the management is exercised – ie, the day-to-day actions required to realise the statutory purpose. By contrast, the place where the fundamental decisions are taken or the place where the simple administrative work (accounting, correspondence) is done can only be taken into account as secondary elements. Other secondary elements used to determine the location of the effective management are the residency of the managing bodies, the place where the operational contracts are executed or the place of storage of the documents and archives.

Particular attention should be paid to the following elements, which must be avoided so as to limit any requalification of the non-local seat as a pure formal seat (and, as the case may be, recognition of a place of effective management in Switzerland):

• domicile and location;
• infrastructure/employees;
• the professional qualifications of employees;
• contracts;
• banking operations;
• book-keeping;
• the board of directors; and
• the annual shareholders’ meeting.

Under Swiss tax law, a foreign company is also subject to limited tax liability when it has a permanent establishment in Switzerland. Only the income derived from the permanent establishment is subject to tax in Switzerland. To constitute a permanent establishment, there must be:

• a place of business;
• which must be fixed; and
• from which business must be carried out.

The interpretation of these conditions is wide, and it is considered that such place of business can be located in the premises of another company.

Furthermore, the corporate tax reform of 2020 states that the Federal Council is competent to determine under what conditions Swiss permanent establishments of foreign companies should be able to claim WHT on income from third countries with a flat rate tax credit.

Please see 6.5 Controlled Foreign Corporation-Type Rules.

If a corporation realises a capital gain on the sale of a qualifying participation, it is entitled to a participation reduction. To qualify for relief on capital gains, a Swiss company must make a profit on the sale of a participation that represents at least 10% of the share capital of another company, which it has held for at least one year. Companies with qualifying capital gains may reduce their corporate income tax by reference to the ratio between net earnings on such participations and total net profit. Losses incurred as a result of the sale of qualifying participations remain tax-deductible.

A capital gain is defined as the difference between the proceeds from the sale of a qualifying participation and the acquisition cost of the investment. Therefore, any amount of previously tax-deductible depreciation or provision on the participation is not taken into consideration when calculating the amount of gain that can benefit from the relief. In addition, revaluation gains from participations do not qualify.

Favourable tax treatment is also available for qualifying participations transferred to group companies abroad; the group holding or sub-holding company must be incorporated in Switzerland.

In Switzerland, general anti-avoidance rules (GAARs) are not contained in a specific act. Through the years, the Federal Supreme Court has developed a general principle of abuse of law or tax avoidance, which applies to all Swiss taxes. In accordance with this principle, tax authorities have the right to tax the taxpayer’s legal structure based on its economic substance, in certain situations. Provided that three cumulative conditions are met (the unusualness/inappropriateness of the structure, the intent to save taxes and the effective tax savings), taxation is determined on the basis of a fictitious state of affairs or a recharacterisation of the facts of the case.

In addition, Swiss tax authorities generally apply the arm’s length principle and follow the OECD transfer pricing guidelines. Swiss regulation also contains specific anti-avoidance provisions.

Regarding the specific issue of treaty shopping, on 7 June 2017 Switzerland signed the OECD’s Multilateral Instrument (MLI), which introduced a “principle purpose test” (PPT), according to which a benefit under a tax treaty shall not be granted if obtaining that benefit was one of the principal purposes of an arrangement or transaction. However, the implementation of the PPT rule through the MLI affects only a handful of DTAs (just over a dozen) as Switzerland has chosen, contrary to the majority, to follow the doctrine of the “amending view” for legal certainty.

Switzerland is conducting simultaneous bilateral discussions with many other jurisdictions to insert the PPT rule. The minimum standard, which includes the PPT rule, also forms part of Switzerland’s treaty policy for the conclusion of new DTAs. Since 2015, the Federal Department of Finance has been instructed to put forward a PPT rule when revising or entering into new DTAs. Thus, several recently bilaterally amended Swiss double taxation treaties now include the PPT (for more details, see 9.1 Adoption of BEPS Recommendations).

Swiss law does not outline the specifics of the tax audit process. After the filing of the tax return by the taxpayer, the tax authorities may request further information/documentation prior to issuing the tax assessment. The tax authorities are obliged and entitled to gather all necessary information to assess a taxpayer on a true and complete basis.

In practice, tax audits may be carried out by the Federal Tax Administration with respect to VAT, WHT and stamp duty, over periods of five years. Once formally announced to the taxpayer, the company is required to grant the tax authorities access to their accounts, including any supporting documents necessary for the audit process.

With regard to the resolution of tax disputes, Switzerland has a well-established and efficient practice. When confronted with an unlawful tax assessment, the taxpayer is generally not obliged to immediately challenge said assessment in court. Rather, the taxpayer may turn to the tax authority that issued the tax assessment decision being challenged, to force it to make a new decision. For the purposes of this chapter, this procedure will be called a formal complaint.

A formal complaint is a quick and efficient procedure that allows numerous questions to be resolved at little cost, with the majority of these being technical questions, thereby eliminating the need for court proceedings; it generally takes a few months. However, for complicated issues, this way of appeal offers limited solutions. In such cases, the tax authorities usually prefer to wait for a binding judgment made by a higher independent body (ie, a court). It is very common for taxpayers to exercise their right to challenge a tax authority’s tax assessment decision. Tax authorities then issue a decision on the formal complaint.

Switzerland is actively participating in the BEPS project and, as such, has already implemented some of the project’s outcomes or is in the process of doing so. Switzerland intends to implement the minimum standard of the BEPS project. Few changes are needed in order to meet these minimum standards.

Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent BEPS (MLI)

On 7 June 2017, Switzerland signed the MLI, which will serve to efficiently amend DTAs in line with minimum standards agreed upon in the BEPS project. Switzerland will implement these minimum standards either within the framework of the MLI or by means of the bilateral negotiation of DTAs. These include the modification of the preamble of DTAs and the prevention of treaty abuse via the PPT. Switzerland has reserved the right not to apply the standards for transparent and dual-resident entities (Articles 3 and 4), the anti-abuse rules for permanent establishments situated in third jurisdictions (Article 10) and the artificial avoidance of permanent establishment status through commissionaire agreements (Article 12).

Switzerland has already renegotiated a significant number of tax treaties to include the MLI measures. The MLI has been approved by the Swiss Parliament and entered into effect in accordance with Article 35 of the MLI.

BEPS Action 5 (Countering Harmful Tax Practices and Patent Boxes)

The implementation of the corporate tax reform in 2020 abolished the privileged tax regimes for holding companies, domiciliary companies and mixed companies, and the existing allocation rules on principal companies, which are no longer acceptable as per international standards. Furthermore, a patent box regime has been introduced in accordance with the OECD standards and is mandatory for all cantons. The net profits from domestic and foreign patterns, as well as similar rights, are to be taxed separately, with a maximum deduction of 90%.

In order to counter further harmful tax practices and to promote transparency, Switzerland introduced the spontaneous exchange of information in tax matters through the adoption of the OECD Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters and the revision of the Swiss Federal Act and the Ordinance on Tax Administrative Assistance Act, all of which entered into force on 1 January 2017. The first exchange of information took place on 1 January 2018 and included an exchange of information on tax rulings.

Finally, as of 2009, Switzerland no longer makes a reservation on Article 26 of the OECD Model Convention on Income and Capital in its double tax treaties on income and capital, and has therefore fully adopted the OECD standards in exchange of information in tax matters.

BEPS Action 6 (Prevention of Treaty Abuse)

With the entry into force of the MLI, Switzerland is expected to adapt the title and preamble of the Swiss tax treaties to the minimum standard. Furthermore, it has opted for the PPT rule alone, which provides that a benefit under a tax treaty shall not be granted if obtaining that benefit was one of the principal purposes of an arrangement or transaction.

BEPS Action 13 (Country-by-Country Reporting)

The Swiss Federal Act on the International Exchange of Country-by Country Reports (CBCR) came into force on 1 December 2017. The first exchange took place in 2020, and to date the OECD review reports have not found any deficiencies on the part of Switzerland.

BEPS Action 14 (Dispute Resolution Mechanism)

Switzerland chose mandatory MAPs within the framework of the MLI, with corresponding adjustment as well as mandatory arbitration. It should be added that Switzerland has more than 30 provisions that deal with arbitration in its treaty network, in the form of either arbitration clauses or most-favoured nations.

Switzerland has embraced the BEPS project from the beginning and is actively contributing to its development. The country is supporting the primary aim of the BEPS project, which is, in essence, the taxation of profits in the jurisdiction where the economic activity that gave rise to the profits took place. Switzerland’s goal remains being compliant with the OECD recommendations and that is why it intends to implement the minimum standard of the BEPS project.

Switzerland has focused mainly on the following standards:

• patent/IP boxes;
• the spontaneous exchange of information on tax advance rulings;
• preferential regimes;
• dispute resolution mechanisms;
• the prevention of treaty abuse; and
• country-by-country reports.

OECD Two-Pillar Reform

Pillars One and Two will likely be given effect, as Switzerland agrees with the premise that taxation rules must be fundamentally reviewed to be adapted to the digitalisation of the economy.

Considering unilateral measures problematic, Switzerland has shown its ongoing support of the common effort to achieve a consensus-based, well-functioning multilateral system for the taxation of enterprises, from the very start of the reform, and was thus one of more than 130 jurisdictions to take part in the historic tax deal reached on 1 July 2021.

In addition to the OECD timeframe that is inadequate for the complexity of its legislative system, Switzerland will face numerous implementation difficulties pertaining to the particularities of its federal structure.

Pillar One

As the OECD’s technical work on Pillar One is much less advanced than that on Pillar Two, concrete national implementation cannot yet be defined, as adaptations of international law are necessary upstream, in particular through the MLI.

One of the difficulties stemming from the Swiss system concerns the division of competences between the Confederation and the cantons. In the Swiss federalist system, where the cantons are responsible for taxation and collection, it is not enough to be economically related to Switzerland: one must be attached to a particular canton for taxation and collection to take place. It is obviously hard to determine to which canton a multinational company that provides services throughout Switzerland, without a physical presence in a particular place, should be attached.

This issue is of political importance since tax rates vary between the cantons, ranging from 12% to 21% (see 1.4 Applicable Corporate and Individual Tax Rates).

Pillar Two

The adaptation of Swiss law to the minimum taxation rules under Pillar Two requires more time than foreseen by the OECD.

In January 2022, the Federal Council decided to introduce the minimum tax rate by means of a constitutional amendment. As required for any modification in the Constitution, a referendum was held on 18 June 2023 and the Swiss population accepted the provisions with 78.5% of the vote. Despite calls from political and economic circles to delay the implementation until 2025, the Swiss Federal Council enacted the new temporary ordinance as per 1 January 2024, introducing the domestic minimum top-up tax (QDMTT). From 1 January 2025, the IIR has been introduced. In 2026, the temporary legislation has undergone a few formal amendments, without altering the substance of the system.

The Swiss Parliament has until 2030 to pass a formal, definitive legislation. Owing to international criticism – particularly in the USA – Switzerland has decided to delay the entry into force of the undertaxed profits rule (UTPR).

It is likely that certain instruments introduced by the recent corporate tax reform (ie, patent box, R&D-super deduction) will become less attractive as they result in effective tax rates below 15%.

The minimum tax will be levied in a targeted manner, meaning that nothing changes for companies operating solely in Switzerland, nor for SMEs. The impact of Pillar Two rules varies from canton to canton, depending on their tax rate.

As has been the case in other Western countries, over the last few years, international tax policy has become more and more of a public debate in Switzerland.

In 2020, Switzerland introduced a major corporate tax reform, mostly due to international developments such as the abolition of holding, mixed and domiciliary company taxation, along with the disclosure of hidden reserves and the introduction of higher taxation of dividends for qualifying shareholders. Moreover, various measures have been included to maintain the attractiveness of the Swiss tax system, such as the introduction of a mandatory patent box regime, and the voluntary introduction of R&D super-deductions at the cantonal level, along with significant general reductions of corporate tax rates.

As mentioned in 9.3 International Tax, the corporate tax reform in 2020 introduced various measures in order for Switzerland to maintain its attractive tax system.

In relation to the minimum tax rate set by Pillar Two, Switzerland is committed to maintaining its attractiveness. The Federal Department of Finance, with the involvement of the cantons and other key economic actors, is drawing up internationally accepted proposals (tax and non-tax measures) that will secure the appeal of Switzerland as a business location.

The competitive tax system in Switzerland includes features such as:

• relatively low ordinary corporate income tax rates (overall effective tax rates ranging from 12% to 14% in most cantons) for companies that are not large multinational enterprises (with consolidated revenues of over EUR750 million);
• patent box regimes and R&D super-deduction regimes;
• tax-neutral step-up of hidden reserves upon entering into Switzerland or transfer of functions to Switzerland; and
• the possibility to easily obtain advanced tax rulings.

All of these rules are in line with OECD/BEPS recommendations.

With the implementation of the corporate tax reform in 2020 and the BEPS recommendations as analysed in 9.1 Adoption of BEPS Recommendations, Switzerland should not have any “vulnerable” areas in its tax regime.

As far as hybrid mismatch arrangements are concerned, the current Swiss tax law is sufficient to prevent any hybrid structures. Switzerland has adopted the common approach. The country’s international tax policy has always supported the elimination of double non-taxation, resulting in an unintended lack of tax co-ordination. It should be noted that the recommendations of the BEPS project are much wider, so any implementation by Switzerland would require a number of changes in Swiss tax domestic law. Finally, Switzerland applies the switch-over clause of Article 5 of the MLI to its residents.

Switzerland applies a worldwide basis jurisdiction to tax, which is limited by the principle of territoriality in certain cases, such as foreign subsidiaries. For the time being, no interest deduction rules in line with Action 4 have been implemented or are expected to be implemented.

Switzerland has thin capitalisation rules that only apply to related parties. In the future, Switzerland may need to change its capitalisation rules in order to expand to the overall level of interest deductions in an entity, but no such motion has yet been put in place.

Switzerland does not have CFC legislation, as Swiss residents are not taxed on profits derived by foreign legal entities, such as foreign subsidiaries, up until they are distributed to the shareholder. Moreover, Switzerland provides for a unilateral tax exemption that is not conditional on the payment of taxes abroad. The above is also reflected in its double tax treaties, as Switzerland favours the application of the exemption method.

However, recent jurisprudence has allowed the taxation of passive income with insufficient nexus with a foreign country. As such, the corporate veil of a foreign legal entity may be pierced, and a broader interpretation of effective management may be admitted. Therefore, although the courts tend to adopt a position similar to the BEPS project principles, for the time being Switzerland does not intend to introduce any CFC legislation into its tax system.        

Switzerland has accepted limitation-of-benefit articles in its DTAs only at the request of some of its treaty partners, namely the USA and Japan. Otherwise, Swiss treaty practice has never favoured such articles.

With the entry into force of the MLI, a GAAR in the form of the PPT applies in accordingly revised tax treaties. However, this GAAR is not new to Swiss law and policy – case law of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (2005) recognises an unwritten GAAR that is conceptually similar to the PPT and is consequently implicitly included in every Swiss DTA (see 4.3 Tax Authority Scrutiny of “Treaty Shopping” Practices). It should be pointed out that controversial issues might arise, as the scope of the PPT is much broader. The current unwritten GAAR is limited to dividends, interest or royalties, whereas the PPT will be applied to all provisions of a DTA.

Switzerland does not have any specific transfer pricing rules in its domestic law. The authorities usually follow OECD guidelines. Furthermore, Switzerland does not plan to make transfer pricing documentation compulsory.

Parent entities of multinational enterprises residing in Switzerland with more than CHF900 million consolidation revenue in the financial year preceding the reporting year, or surrogate parent entities, must comply with the country-by-country reporting obligations and provide the Federal Tax Administration with the report.

The first financial year in which country-by-country reporting became mandatory was on or after 1 January 2018, and the reports have been exchanged with partner countries since the beginning of 2020. The submission of reports for the 2016 and 2017 tax years is still optional. Since 2020, Switzerland can exchange country-by-country reports with more than 80 partner states.

As far as transparency is concerned, Switzerland issues tax rulings, including advanced tax rulings, which clarify the tax consequences of a certain given transaction planned by the taxpayer. A tax ruling is a very important tool that facilitates the co-operation of the taxpayer with the authorities, rendering the Swiss tax system more certain, efficient and attractive. In order to be in line with BEPS Action 5, tax rulings have been subject to the spontaneous exchange of information since 2018.

Switzerland has not taken any unilateral action with regard to the taxation of the digital economy. The State Secretary for International Finance has been working intensively on the taxation of the digital economy, and has performed an analysis on the subject.

Switzerland is of the view that it is necessary to favour multinational approaches, where tax profits are taxed in the jurisdiction where added value is generated and that does not cause double or over-taxation, and also that measures outside the scope of DTAs are to be avoided.

As mentioned previously, rather than a myriad of uncoordinated unilateral measures, Switzerland favours a long-term and multinational approach within the framework of the existing international tax rules and the Inclusive Framework and, as such, has not taken any specific unilateral measure towards digital taxation such as a Digital Services Tax.

Switzerland has not introduced any specific provision regarding the taxation of offshore intellectual property deployed from inland. Moreover, Switzerland does not levy WHT on royalties, whether paid to a resident or a non-resident person. However, profits of companies formally domiciled abroad with little or no local substance that are effectively managed in Switzerland or that have a permanent establishment in Switzerland may be subject to Swiss income tax (see 6.5 Controlled Foreign Corporation-Type Rules for full details).