According to a decision of the Supreme Tax Court, the inheritance tax exemption granted to the surviving spouse upon acquisition of the family home must not be revoked retroactively if its continued use for own residential purposes is impossible or unreasonable due to health reasons. The same applies to the tax exemption granted to children as heirs, the BFH said in another judgment from the same date.
In a decision of the Supreme Tax Court published on 12 November 2020, the Court held that the electronic filing of an income tax return may be considered unreasonable from an economic point of view, where the cost of setting up and maintaining a system for the transmission of remote data bears no meaningful economic correlation to the income triggered by the obligation to file the tax returns electronically
The Federal Ministry of Finance has sent the Federal States (“the Länder”) a draft bill to amend the Real Estate Transfer Tax Act for discussion. The main points of this bill are set out below: However, the draft may still be subject to changes in the discussion process or may even fail altogether.
With the entry into force of the Act for the Modernisation of Partnership Law (“MoPeG”) on 1 January 2024, the legislators fundamentally reformed the rules regarding defective resolutions for commercial partnerships (OHG, KG, GmbH & Co. KG). Sections 109–115 of the German Commercial Code (HGB) contain for the first time detailed provisions on resolution procedures and the judicial enforcement of resolution defects.
In two judgments published in April 2025, the Supreme Tax Court decided that a corporation in which there is an atypical silent partnership can be a subsidiary within a corporation tax group. With its rulings, the court deviated from an earlier opinion of the tax authorities. The Federal Ministry of Finance has now commented on the consequences of the two judgments.
In a recently published decision, the Supreme Tax Court had to determine whether, and under what conditions, the acquisition of a share in a partnership is subject to real estate transfer tax if the interest is held under a trust arrangement and the share is later transferred from the trustee to the trustor.
In the case of an atypical (non-typical) silent partnership interest in a limited partnership, the tax bases for the “partnership and atypical silent partner” and those for the limited partnership cannot be determined separately and uniformly in a single assessment notice, the Supreme Tax Court said in a most recently published decision.
The profit from the sale of a share in the upper-tier partnership as prescribed in Section 7 sentence 2 no. 2 Trade Tax Act is not to be allocated to the hidden reserves of the upper-tier partnership and the hidden reserves of the lower-tier partnership. It is rather a single and uniform sales transaction at the level of the upper-tier partnership, the Supreme Tax Court said in a most recently published decision.
In a most recent decision, the Supreme Tax Court upheld the tax office’s refusal to allow a partnership to compute its income on tonnage tax principles – as these presuppose an intent to operate the ship in international waters in the long term. Furthermore, the court decided that the determination of profits by tonnage for a subsequent year requires that specific requirements laid down in section 5a (1) sentence 1 and (2) of the Income Tax Act as to time and deadlines are met.
A shareholder loan granted to an asset-managing partnership is not recognized from a tax point of view insofar as the company's loan liability is attributable to its shareholder for tax purposes (Section 39 (2) no. 2 of the German Fiscal Code). According to a recent decision of the Supreme Tax Court, the loan agreement neither leads to deductible income-related expenses for the borrower nor to income from capital assets for the lender but is rather considered a tax-neutral contribution. This would be different only in the case of commercially active partnerships.
A shareholder loan granted to an asset-managing partnership is not recognized from a tax point of view insofar as the company's loan liability is attributable to its shareholder for tax purposes (Section 39 (2) no. 2 of the German Fiscal Code). According to a recent decision of the Supreme Tax Court, the loan agreement neither leads to deductible income-related expenses for the borrower nor to income from capital assets for the lender but is rather considered a tax-neutral contribution. This would be different only in the case of commercially active partnerships.
In a recently published judgment, the Supreme Tax Court held that the profit from the sale of the share in a project company in the legal form of a partnership (GmbH & Co. KG) is not included in the trading income of the plaintiff, a limited liability company (GmbH), because the conditions for trade tax liability - namely, the operation of a business as defined in Section 2 (1) Sentence 1 of the Trade Tax Act - were not (yet) met.
In a most recently published decision, the Supreme Tax Court held that the first acquisition of a share in a partnership by a party who was not previously a partner under civil law is a taxable event for real estate transfer tax purposes pursuant to Section 1 (2a) of the Real Estate Transfer Tax Act (RETTA).
The General Court of the European Union confirmed in its judgment of 18 May 2022 that the German aid for the rescue of Condor is compatible with EU law. The fact that Condor’s financial difficulties were caused by the Thomas Cook group being placed into liquidation did not preclude the approval of that aid by the Commission.
In a decision published in April 2025 the Supreme Tax Court held that the effective day on which the actual activities are carried out by a partnership is relevant to determine the begin of its trade tax liability.
An untypical silent partnership in the controlled group company does not generally prevent the recognition of a consolidated tax group for corporation tax purposes. With this current decision, the Supreme Tax Court disagrees with the previous opinion of the tax authorities.
The fact that a commercial limited partnership (KG) receives income ranking as business income because of the so called „tainting effect“ does not preclude the partial write-off of a worthless loan owed to its partner if the principles of corresponding accounting between partnership and the partners no longer apply because of the discontinuation (cessation) of the business of the KG. Unlike the tax court of first instance, the Supreme Tax Court allowed the loss from the partial write-down to be recognized already at the time of the cessation of the business activities.
When determining whether a corporation with a direct interest in the partnership owning real estate is considered a new shareholder within the meaning of Section 1 (2a) sentence 4 of the Real Estate Transfer Tax Act because at least 90% of the shares are transferred to new shareholders, only the shareholding in the corporation must be taken into account. In a most current judgment, the Supreme Tax Court held that a previous participation of the new shareholder of the corporation in the partnership owning the real estate is irrelevant in this respect.
In a recently published decision, the Supreme Tax Court held that the profit from the sale of a limited partnership share which is proportionally encumbered with an atypical sub-participation is fully subject to trade tax.
The Supreme Tax Court decided that expenses for a gym membership are generally not tax deductible as personal extraordinary and inevitable expenses. This also applies if the participation in a medically prescribed functional training program requires a membership in the gym.
