Currently the type of economic arrangement in marriage does not play any role for taxes (AFAIK), so why should it change in future? I think it is only relevant for inheritance. Happy to be corrected.
Huh. Now, when I am thinking about it:
- The best arrangement (lowest tax) with the new system (individual taxation of spouses) is when both spouses have an approximately equal income.
- Assets are also producing taxable income.
- By shifting income-producing assets into the account of a spouse earning less income, you can optimize taxes somewhat.
- ???
- PROFIT!!!1111
4 Likes
⊠and divorce, with the spouse rightly argueing that was a gift falling into her very own bucket?
What I would do as the tax authority, is to rely on the marital asset statute, usually âErrungenschaftsbeteiligungâ, meaning everyone gets 50% of the stuff accrued during marriage, and tax accordingly.
As @Strabor also hints at, this does follow the marriage contract (which specifies who owns what):
EinkĂŒnfte, Vermögen und AbzĂŒge werden der steuerpflichtigen Person nach ihren zivilrechtlichen VerhĂ€ltnissen sowie nach ihren weiteren gesetzlichen Anspruchsberechtigungen zugerechnet.
So, that would mean that
- âGĂŒtertrennungâ results in assets and their returns being taxed as if people remained individuals.
- âGĂŒtergemeinschaftâ in factual splitting (most advantageous).
- âErrungenschaftsbeteiligungâ in splitting for the âErrungenschaftâ, and the rest attributed to whichever individual owns it.
But income from work would be attributed to whoever earned it regardless.
Why simple when complex do trick? Optimization will have significant effects over multiple domains (taxes, marital liabilities). Negative âErrungenschaftâ will get a nice dedicated section in a future Kreischreiben. Canât say I like it, but I guess, itâs better than before.
At least itâs less work to process filings when peopleâs marital status change, since assets/income wonât drastically change.
(I saw it mentioned during one of the debates)
As I undestand it, while married, there is actually no difference between âGĂŒtertrennungâ and âErrungenschaftsbeteiligungâ. There is only a difference upon death or divorce.
âGĂŒtergemeinschaftâ does affect the marriage, though.
I donât think thatâs the case, itâs just that currently people donât have to track/deal with it until the marriage ends. The ownership status doesnât suddenly change.
1 Like
Each spouse manages and uses their own âErrungenschaftâ, not half of their own and half of their spouse. There can be joint accounts, of course, where both have full access and I expect those to be split equally for individual taxation purposes.
I think it does. Thatâs the effect of settlement between the âErrungenschaftenâ (âgĂŒterrechtliche Auseinandersetzungâ, see Fedlex).
I see no chance that this would essentially be calculated for every tax declaration, based on current law, and it would also be completely impractical (at least for some constellations).
1 Like
The marital asset status is not the same as the formal property (Eigentum). The first is rather concerned with the value.
Practically, the question of property can mostly be avoided during marriage. So for practical purposes, you a) do not examine it, if you do not have to, (b) use land registry for property until dissolution of marriage or litigation (special cases apply).
There are also the presumptions for assets being part of âErrungenschaftâ and that a movable property belongs to the one who holds it (Besitz). Debts belong to the person who made them, if they were not for the purposes of the marital community.
Taxation does not have to always strictly follow the marital asset status. As mentioned, work income is Errungenschaft but will probably taxed at the earning spouse.
I donât think itâs going to be âprobablyâ 
(the spouse generating the income gets taxed).
What e.g. Imposition individuelle: tout le monde est concernĂ© says is that indeed youâd have to assign property, but in the absence of information youâd likely just split everything.
I wonder how will integrated this is going to be in the tax software (e.g. splitting assets, ideally youâd want to make it easy for the tax office to check that both half are present).
Also if thereâs implicit donations between spouse, theyâll have to be explicit (for instance if contribution to real estate purchase wasnât equal but the ownership was equal).
I have been wondering on this topic and the taxation changes (albeit from 2031-2032) from the perspective of my early retirement plans.
My conclusion so far (please let me know if I misunderstand):
- wealth tax (wealth split 50/50) will decrease, potentially quite a bit - good
- vested benefit accounts and 3rd pillar withdrawal can be basically done 2 times per year in smaller separate chunks - very good
- Income tax (if in retirement the only income is dividends, the stocks can be distributed between spouses according to this) - may be a slight advantage
- AVS gap contributions (between end of work and claiming) and AVS benefit - no change
So i am now preparing for this ensuring 50/50 split for all assets and building a similar 2nd and 3rd pillar structure for optimised withdrawals.
Wealth tax may be adjusted in Cantons and free gifts among spouses limited to reduce tax losses. The first is politically feasible in many Cantons.
Generally, I would advise against preemptive restructurings in this. Too many linked issues and uncertainties about the actual solution. No retroactivity probable. Planing and thinking is however good, of course.
1 Like