Switzerland has met all aspects of the terms of reference (OECD, 2021[1]) (ToR) for the calendar year 2024 (year in review), and no recommendations are made.
Switzerland can legally issue four types of rulings within the scope of the transparency framework.
In practice, Switzerland issued rulings within the scope of the transparency framework as follows:
Type of ruling | Number of rulings |
Past rulings | 883 |
Future rulings in the calendar year 2017 | 300 |
Future rulings in the calendar year 2018 | 228 |
Future rulings in the calendar year 2019 | 293 |
Future rulings in the calendar year 2020 | 214 |
Future rulings in the calendar year 2021 | 234 |
Future rulings in the calendar year 2022 | 282 |
Future rulings in the calendar year 2023 | 289 |
Future rulings in the year in review | 242 |
Peer input was received from ten jurisdictions in respect of the exchanges of information on rulings received from Switzerland. The input was generally positive, noting in most cases that overall information was complete, in a correct format and received in a timely manner.
1. Switzerland can legally issue the following four types of rulings within the scope of the transparency framework: (i) preferential regimes;1 (ii) cross-border unilateral APAs and any other cross-border unilateral tax rulings (such as an advance tax ruling) covering transfer pricing or the application of transfer pricing principles; (iii) permanent establishment rulings; and (iv) related party conduit rulings.
2. For Switzerland, past rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued on or after 1 January 2010 until 31 December 2016, provided they were still in effect as at 1 January 2018. For Switzerland, future rulings are any tax rulings within scope that are issued on or after 1 January 2017, provided they are still in effect on or after 1 January 2018.
3. In the prior year’s peer review reports, it was determined that Switzerland’s undertakings to identify past and future rulings and all potential exchange jurisdictions were sufficient to meet the minimum standard. In addition, it was determined that Switzerland’s review and supervision mechanism was sufficient to meet the minimum standard. Switzerland’s implementation remains unchanged, and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard.
4. Switzerland has met all of the ToR for the information gathering process and no recommendations are made.
5. Switzerland has the necessary domestic legal basis to exchange information spontaneously. Switzerland notes that there are no legal or practical impediments that prevent the spontaneous exchange of information on rulings as contemplated in the Action 5 minimum standard.
6. Switzerland has international agreements permitting spontaneous exchange of information, including: (i) the Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters: Amended by the 2010 Protocol (OECD/Council of Europe, 2011[2]) (“the Convention”).2 The necessary domestic and international legal framework for spontaneous exchange of information entered into force on 1 January 2017, allowing for exchanges from 1 January 2018.
7. In the prior year’s peer review report, it was determined that Switzerland’s process for the completion and exchange of templates was sufficient to meet the minimum standard.
8. For the year in review, the timeliness of exchanges is as follows:
|
Future rulings within the scope of the transparency framework |
Number of exchanges transmitted within three months of the information becoming available to the competent authority or immediately after legal impediments have been lifted |
Delayed exchanges |
||
|
Number of exchanges transmitted later than three months of the information on rulings becoming available to the competent authority |
Reasons for the delays |
Any other comments |
||
|
398 |
83 |
N/A |
N/A |
|
|
Follow-up requests received for exchange of the ruling |
Number |
Average time to provide response |
Number of requests not answered |
|
1 |
89 days |
N/A |
9. Switzerland reports that the exchanges were delayed due to an error in the IT system caused by the updates to the common transmission system (CTS). Switzerland notes that the error has now been fixed and no further delays are to be expected. As such, no recommendation is made and this will be further monitored in the next peer review.
10. Switzerland has the necessary legal basis for spontaneous exchange of information, a process for completing the templates in a timely way and has completed all exchanges. Switzerland has met all of the ToR for the exchange of information process and no recommendations are made.
11. The statistics for the year in review are as follows:
|
Category of ruling |
Number of exchanges |
Jurisdictions exchanged with |
|
Ruling related to a preferential regime |
0 |
N/A |
|
Cross-border unilateral APAs and any other cross-border unilateral tax rulings (such as an advance tax ruling) covering transfer pricing or the application of transfer pricing principles |
3704 |
Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China (People’s Republic of), Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Guernsey, Hong Kong (China), Hungary, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jersey, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Peru, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovak Republic, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Türkiye, United Kingdom, Uruguay |
|
Cross-border rulings providing for a unilateral downward adjustment to the taxpayer’s taxable profits that is not directly reflected in the taxpayer’s financial / commercial accounts |
0 |
|
|
Permanent establishment rulings |
405 |
Australia, Barbados, Canada, Cyprus, Germany, Guernsey, Hungary, India, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, United Kingdom |
|
Related party conduit rulings |
5 |
De minimis rule applies |
|
IP regimes: total exchanges on taxpayers benefitting from the third category of IP assets, new entrants benefitting from grandfathered IP regimes; and taxpayers making use of the option to treat the nexus ratio as a rebuttable presumption |
0 |
|
|
Total |
415 |
12. In the prior years’ peer review report, it was determined that Switzerland’s information gathering and exchange of information processes for matters related to intellectual property regimes6 were sufficient to meet the minimum standard. Switzerland’s implementation in this regard remains unchanged and therefore continues to meet the minimum standard.
Aspect of implementation of the transparency framework that should be improved | Recommendation for improvement |
No recommendations are made. |
← 1. Patent box.
← 2. Participating jurisdictions to the Convention are available here: www.oecd.org/tax/exchange-of-tax-information/convention-on-mutual-administrative-assistance-in-tax-matters.htm.
← 3. Two of those exchanges were transmitted within 91 days, one exchange within 92 days, one exchange within 108 days and four within 142 days of the information on rulings becoming available to the competent authority. The exchanges made within 108 and 142 days, respectively, were delayed due to an error in the IT system caused by updates to the CTS. One of the rulings exchanged within 142 days with multiple affected jurisdictions was transmitted within 66 days to one of the jurisdictions which does not use the CTS.
← 4. 9 exchanges fall in two categories.
← 5. 9 exchanges fall in two categories.
← 6. Patent box.