1. Facts of the Case
Real Estate AG sells its commercial property—which it constructed in 2017 for CHF 10 million (excl. VAT) and has since leased under the full VAT exemption—to Invest AG for CHF 15 million (land value: CHF 3 million).
Real Estate AG sells the property as described in the base case to Hospital AG. To date, 50% of the property has been leased to hospital employees and the other 50% to a restaurant operator with an option to purchase. The purchaser wishes to continue the current use of the property. It settles taxes using flat-rate tax rates.
Questions
- How should the transfers of ownership be treated for VAT purposes?
- What are the consequences for the seller and the purchaser?
1. Facts
Group company A owns a property that it has used for its production activities to date but will no longer need in the future, as it is outsourcing production to third parties. It transfers this property to group company B at income tax values. The primary purpose of Group Company B is to hold, manage, and actively market real estate.
From a direct tax perspective, the requirements for a tax-neutral intra-group transfer of business fixed assets pursuant to Art. 61(3) DBG and Art. 24(3quarter) StHG are met.
Questions
- Can or must the notification procedure under Art. 38 of the Value-Added Tax Act (MWSTG) be applied to the transfer?
- Are there other transfer options from a VAT perspective, and how should these be assessed?
1. Facts
Construction company A wishes to spin off its real estate holdings into a subsidiary, B, as part of its succession planning. To this end, the real estate (properties leased under an option agreement), two part-time employees for property management, receivables and liabilities arising from the real estate business, and business fixed assets (furniture, software) will be transferred to the subsidiary.
- Option A: The requirements for a real estate business pursuant to KS 5a “Restructuring” dated February 1, 2022, Section 3.2.2.3, are met. This therefore constitutes a tax-neutral restructuring transaction under Art. 61 of the Federal Income Tax Act (DBG).
- Option B: The requirements for a real estate business within the meaning of KS 5a are not met (i.e., the ratio of 1 employee, CHF 20 million in rental income, and CHF 40 million in real estate assets is not met = standard case). The spin-off is therefore not possible on a tax-neutral basis under Art. 61 DBG.
- Option C: Construction company A spins off its construction operations, including its operational real estate, into subsidiary B. Company A retains the properties leased to third parties, two part-time employees, and the receivables and liabilities related to real estate leasing.
Questions
- Can or must the notification procedure under Art. 38 of the Value-Added Tax Act (MWSTG) be applied to the transfer?
- Are there other transfer options from a VAT perspective?
1. Facts
Hephaistos AG, which has been registered in the VAT register since 1995 and effectively files VAT returns, uses a building in Uster, in the canton of Zurich, for commercial purposes. On January 1, 2021, Hephaistos AG has the commercially used building demolished by Perses AG and begins partial development of the now vacant lot. Apartments are being built for rental to private individuals.
Perses AG issues an invoice to Hephaistos AG for the demolition, including VAT.
Questions
- Is Hephaistos AG entitled to claim an input tax deduction on the demolition costs?
- Does it matter that the new development covers only a portion of the property?
1. Facts
Xenios AG, which has been registered in the VAT register since 1995 and effectively files VAT returns, uses a hotel building in Ostermundigen in the canton of Bern for commercial purposes (hotel operations). On January 1, 2021, Xenios AG had the hotel building renovated by Janus AG; hotel operations were discontinued. After the renovation, the former hotel rooms were rented out as apartments to private individuals.
Janus AG issues an invoice to Xenios AG for the renovation, including value-added tax.
Question
- Is Xenios AG entitled to claim an input tax deduction for the renovation work?
1. Facts
Hephaistos AG, which has been registered in the VAT register since 1995 and actually files VAT returns, uses a building in Brig in the canton of Valais for commercial purposes. On January 1, 2021, Hephaistos AG sells the commercially used building to Thetis AG. Thetis AG then commissions Perses AG to carry out the demolition. Subsequently, it begins development of the now vacant lot. Apartments are being built for rental to private individuals.
Perses AG issues an invoice to Thetis AG for the demolition, including value-added tax.
Questions
- Is Thetis AG entitled to claim an input tax deduction on the demolition costs?
- Do you see any potential for VAT optimization?
1. Facts
Hephaistos AG, which has been registered in the VAT register since 1995 and effectively files VAT returns, owns a building in Airolo, in the canton of Ticino, that is used for commercial purposes. On January 1, 2019, Hephaistos AG sells the building to Thetis AG. Thetis AG intends to demolish the building and subsequently construct apartments (to be rented to private individuals for residential purposes). Thetis AG commissions Perses AG to carry out the demolition, which takes place on July 1, 2022. From the purchase of the residential building on January 1, 2019, until its demolition on July 1, 2022, Thetis AG leased the commercial building with an option (temporary use).
Perses AG issues an invoice to Thetis AG for the demolition, including VAT.
Question
- Is Thetis AG entitled to claim an input tax deduction on the demolition costs?