Anyone who cancels their fixed-rate mortgage before the deadline often has to pay the lending bank steep sums. In two new leading rulings, the Federal Supreme Court has now clarified the effects that such payments – known as early repayment penalties – can have on property gains tax and income tax. It thus establishes guidelines for the cantons and ensures a certain degree of standardization of the different cantonal regulations. <\/p>\n
Specifically, a case from the canton of Zurich had to be assessed. The owners sold a commercial building there and redeemed the mortgages on it prematurely in return for a prepayment penalty of a good CHF 2.5 million. They then wanted to deduct the payment made from their property gains tax, but were denied this by the Zurich tax commission, the cantonal tax office and the administrative court.<\/p>\n
Wrongly, says the Federal Supreme Court and upholds the sellers’ appeal. Although the Federal Tax Harmonization Act gives the cantons considerable leeway in the taxation of property gains, it also requires a uniform definition of certain terms. According to the Federal Supreme Court, prepayment penalties always fall under the legal concept of (deductible) “investment costs” and must be deducted from profits for property gains tax purposes if the termination of the mortgage is inextricably linked to the sale of the property. This was the case here: the mortgage was definitively terminated immediately before the property was sold and was not replaced by a new mortgage. <\/p>\n
Precisely the opposite conditions apply for a deduction from income tax, as the Federal Supreme Court stated in a Neuch\u00e2tel case. Here too, the mortgage was terminated early before the apartment was sold and a prepayment penalty of a good CHF 44,000 was paid. The sellers wanted to deduct this payment from their income tax as debt interest, which the Neuch\u00e2tel tax authorities rejected. That was correct, says the Federal Supreme Court. Prepayment penalties could only be equated with debt interest and claimed for income tax purposes if the terminated mortgage was replaced by another with the same lender. So if you want to replace your fixed-rate mortgage with a cheaper one with a lower interest rate or switch to a different financing model and conclude the new contract with the same bank, you can deduct the compensation payment from your income. This was not the case here, which is why a deduction from income tax is not possible, says the Federal Supreme Court. (The question of whether the Neuch\u00e2tel sellers could have deducted the compensation payment from their property gains tax was not the subject of the proceedings).<\/p>\n
At the same time, the Federal Supreme Court states that a deduction of early repayment compensation is excluded for both property gains tax and income tax purposes. Expenses that have already been taken into account for one tax cannot be deducted again for the other. <\/p>\n
The two BGE publications Katharina Fontana, NZZ from 28.4.2017<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Compensation payments for the early exit from a mortgage can be deducted from income tax or property gains tax. The Federal Supreme Court specifies the requirements.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":8417,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[726],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-62131","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-real-estate-knowledge"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/wp-content\/uploads\/dji_0108.jpg","featured_image_data":{"title":"dji_0108","url":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/wp-content\/uploads\/dji_0108.jpg","width":1920,"height":1080,"srcset":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/wp-content\/uploads\/dji_0108-400x400.jpg 400w, https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/wp-content\/uploads\/dji_0108-600x600.jpg 600w, https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/wp-content\/uploads\/dji_0108-768x432.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/wp-content\/uploads\/dji_0108-1536x864.jpg 1536w, https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/wp-content\/uploads\/dji_0108-1600x900.jpg 1600w","sizes":"(max-width:400px) 400px, (max-width:600px) 600px, (max-width:768px) 768px, (max-width:1536px) 1536px, (max-width:1600px) 1600px","type":"image\/jpeg"},"featured_image_url":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/wp-content\/uploads\/dji_0108.jpg","readingTime":3,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62131","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=62131"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62131\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":73692,"href":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62131\/revisions\/73692"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/8417"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=62131"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=62131"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ginesta.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=62131"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
Judgment from Neuchatel<\/a>
Judgment from Zurich<\/a><\/p>\n