Switzerland: Why the Swiss Corporate Tax Reform III needs to be aligned with BEPS

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Kingsley Napley’s claimants are arguing that taxing the provision of education breaches the European Convention on Human Rights
While pillar two can progress without the US, it won’t reach the same heights without American involvement, argues Renáta Bláhová, founding partner of BMB Partners Taxand
There are unanswered questions as to how foreign investors could reclaim money via tax credits, advisers suggested
Amid an ever-changing tax environment, India’s advisory market is bustling with competition ahead of the 2025 World Tax rankings and ITR Awards
The deal comes after PwC had accused Paul McNab of using confidential information; in other news, McDermott hired a new London tax head from a US rival
Looking at transfer pricing simplification is “obviously helpful”, but it should be done in line with current standards, a senior government figure reportedly said
The UK Government’s plans to close the tax gap via increased HM Revenue and Customs investment have failed to impress local tax advisers
Under the merged scheme for R&D tax relief introduced last year, rules on contracted out R&D have changed. James Dudbridge argues for a proactive approach when reviewing companies’ commercial arrangements
Cultural nuances could account for tax advisers’ perceived poor cost management, a local partner told ITR
Updated rules represent a significant shift in the Luxembourg TP landscape and emphasise the need for robust arm’s-length calculations, says Vanessa Ramos Ferrin of TransFair Pricing Solutions
Gift this article