In M&A transactions, the holding company or other group-internal management companies are often involved in the purchase or sale of shares, with the consequence that they have to pay the transfer stamp tax on these transactions. The SFTA has published a practice clarification in which the qualification of group-internal management companies as securities dealers (particularly with regard to M&A transactions) is specified. It also specifies in which cases group parent companies, which already qualify as securities dealers due to the fact that they hold taxable securities with a book value of more than CHF 10 million in their books, are to be regarded as intermediaries for the purposes of the transfer stamp tax in M&A transactions.
According to a court decision from 2021, a parent company acts as an intermediary for the purposes of the transfer stamp tax in an M&A transaction (which is carried out by another group company) if a member of the board of directors or employee of the parent company initiates the transaction as an evidence broker («Nachweismäkler») or plays a significant role in the negotiations and conclusion of the contract (intermediary broker; «Vermittlungsmäkler»).
Since group parent companies often have investments with a book value of more than CHF 10 million in their balance sheet, they often qualify as a securities dealer regardless of their activity. Consequently, the parent companies have to pay the transfer stamp tax on M&A transactions.
However, according to the previous practice of the SFTA, management companies within a group can also become securities dealers due to their activity as intermediaries (i.e. without having taxable securities with a value of more than CHF 10 million in their balance sheet).
As a result of the aforementioned court decision, the SFTA has been assessing in tax audits the role of employees of parent companies and intra-group management companies in M&A transactions in more detail.
Last Friday, the SFTA published the following practice clarification:
The clarification of the practice regarding the activities of group parent companies basically reflects the practice established in the 2021 court case. The additional note that when an investment bank is commissioned, the qualification as an intermediary is waived will mean a relaxation of the practice in some cases. In practice, however, the clarification of the practice regarding the group's internal management companies (which do not qualify as securities dealers based on the CHF 10 million criterion) is likely to be particularly important.
It remains to be seen how narrow the scope of the new practice is and whether it is also applicable to non-M&A transactions. The practice clarification therefore requires interpretation. A case-by-case assessment is therefore still necessary. In the practice clarification, the SFTA then also calls for a ruling to be submitted for the specific facts. The practice clarification will be applied to all open facts with immediate effect.
Benjamin De Zordi
Luca Poggioli