Germany: EGC rules German exception to change-in-ownership rule qualifies as unlawful state aid

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

Germany: EGC rules German exception to change-in-ownership rule qualifies as unlawful state aid

Linn
Braun

Alexander Linn

Thorsten Braun

On February 4 2016, the European General Court (EGC) issued a decision upholding the 2011 decision of the European Commission that the 'restructuring exception' in Germany's rules relating to the carryforward of tax losses by companies in financial difficulties constituted illegal state aid under EU law.

Under the change-in-ownership rules, a direct or indirect share transfer of more than 25% and up to 50% (or of more than 50%) of the shares in a company that has loss carryforwards results in a pro rata (or full) forfeiture of the carryforwards. One of the few exceptions to this rule was the restructuring exception, which granted relief for built-in gains and for certain acquisitions of businesses that are in distress, subject to a number of conditions.

The European Commission regarded the relief for distressed businesses as unlawful state aid and requested the German Government not to apply the rule in existing and open cases. The government objected but lost its case before the EGC for procedural reasons. The case against the European Commission then was brought to the EGC by several taxpayers in separate cases of which two have now been decided. Both taxpayers had obtained binding rulings from the German tax authorities confirming their entitlement to future loss offsets despite harmful changes in ownership. The rulings were withdrawn after the European Commission made its request to the German government.

The EGC held that the general rule requires the forfeiture of loss relief on a change-in-ownership and the exception confers a selective advantage on the beneficiary without regard to individual circumstances and, therefore, prefers certain (distressed) companies over their competitors. The court rejected the argument that the change-in-ownership provisions were intended to prevent the abusive practice of buying tax loss companies, whereas the exception was designed to assist distressed companies, because a rescue attempt was not the only non-abusive share acquisition in a loss-making company. The decision of the EGC was appealed by at least one of the taxpayers so that the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) will have the final word on the matter (case ref. C-203/16 P).

Alexander Linn (allinn@deloitte.de) and Thorsten Braun (tbraun@deloitte.de)

Deloitte

Tel: +49 89 29036 8558 and +49 69 75695 6444

Website: www.deloitte.de

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Brazil’s shift to a nationwide consumption tax is more than conceptual; it fundamentally transforms municipal revenue, enforcement, and administrative disputes
While some advisers praised the ruling’s definition of a ‘voucher’ for VAT purposes, a UK partner said the case left unanswered questions
While pillar two has been enacted on paper in Brazil, companies are encountering a range of practical compliance issues, ITR has heard
Moore, founding partner of the Chicago tax boutique which bears her name, shares her career wisdom for ITR’s new Women in Tax interview series
But partners at the firm admit that jumping ship to the US would not be as easy as some believe
Governments are rewriting tax policy for the AI era, deploying digital taxes, tailored incentives and algorithmic enforcement that redefine where value is created
Wingrove will succeed Bill Thomas, who has served in the role since 2017; in other news, Andersen unveiled a sharp increase in revenues for 2025
Partners are divided on Italy vs PDM D’s analytical depth, evidentiary standards, and what the judgment signals for future intra-group financing cases
As GCCs increasingly become strategic hubs, multinationals face heightened risks around permanent establishment and place of effective management
While all options presented ‘drawbacks’, European Commission tax leader Wopke Hoekstra said the controversial US carve-out deal has ‘many benefits’
Gift this article