Recommendation for lawyer to reclaim tax at source

Taxes
1

I have been reviewing fedlex recently, but indeed there are no explicit provisions specifying a deadline for the refund of withholding tax. There is, however, a specific time limit, 3 years, for ordinary taxation. The catch is that Switzerland is strictly bound by bilateral freedom of movement agreements, they violate them if they treat EU citizens differently from locals in any respect.

It annoys me so 'm going to put the stubborn canton under the wall, calling them at EU court if they won’t correct their behavior promptly. Therefore I guess I’d prefer to go right a way with a lawyer who can handle the EU case.

4 Likes
2

First, clarify the discrimination so that I can understand it.

Then if there is discrimination, you first need to go through the local courts before you can appeal to EU courts.

Lastly, this is going to cost a lot of money. Are you really going to go there?

3

So you’ve been waiting longer than three years for your taxed at source refund?

And your goal would be that the law be amended to include the same three-year deadline?

4

Don’t assume, actually ask a lawyer. They will tell you up front if it’s a crystal clear case or not.

Wrong, nothing has to be amended. It’s already enforced by bilateral agreements.

5

So you basically only want your local tax office to treat your tax declaration of 2021 or so?

How large of a refund are you expecting??

Unless you enjoy the challenge, I’d propose to use the time for more useful endeavours - like enjoying your life or working (or both at the same time).

And relax about the feeling of being descriminated against. I got the impression that the Swiss tax offices are overcharged and underqualified… if that makes you feel better about it, they are probably just procrastinating on the cases that seem less urgent and possibly more complex to them which happen to be the cases that have already be taxed at source.

3 Likes
6

Wait, whatvis even the Problem? Withholding tax is generally applied to the next tax declaration. This is an automatic process and it happens even before your tax bill was finalized.

So: in ‚25 you declare ‚24 WHT. They at the end of ‚25 take that (claimed) amount and directly credit it against your ‚26 tax bill… so you actually get your funds prett much immediately - just not in cash but as credit. When the tax declaration then takes 3 years plus (which is normal actually), that doesnt matter any more (unless you claimed WHT not paid).

So tell me: what exactly is the Problem You try to adress?

7

Please clarify what you are suing Tax office for?

1 Like
8

Is there discrimination on the deadline? EU citizens being taxed at source are treated the same as Swiss citizens taxed at source. The fact that there’s a different process for processing tax return between at source and not is what makes the difference.

If there’s discrimination it’s that EU citizens are taxed at source, but I doubt it’s something where the bilateral applies.

9

I’m curious, do you have a link for this? (I failed to find it, might be missing the right keywords)

10

I’ll have to dig through a box of papers-to-be-destroyed to find the letter, but it was the tax office which let me know about the article. Just googling, I guess it might be the art 120, but it states 5 years. Maybe I just mixed it, out of frustration. Fedlex

Few lines about the other comments:

No I don’t plan to fight. Typically when a lawyer sends a letter they’ll read it twice and think twice if it’s worth to procrastinate and BS you. So basically the cost is 1-2 h lawyer’s charge, especially if the lawyer has a record of dealing with similar case. The lawyer will also tell you right away if the case it trivial, solid backed by the law, or a bit finicky leading into negotiation or court hearings.

The Swiss law wasn’t made to be fair towards EU foreigners as there was no such requirement/obligation, and suddenly the agreements the country have signed up for with EU make them headaches. A classic example was with the family which won against the tax office which didn’t let them account the same deductions as an ordinary taxation, so Switzerland had to quickly adapt the law letting anyone from EU to switch from simplified tax return of people taxed at source to ordinary tax return.

I can’t officially deduct the overpaid (not returned yet) tax in the following years. They just keep sending statements about negative balance with attached payslips. I always reply that this “debt” is covered by the amount I’ve overpaid, but few months later rinse-repeat the same automatic ping-pong. You should also know that when you don’t have any tax year closed, the following years are kept pending, so you are obliged to keep all tax documentation and what not as your declaration might be challenged once finally worked on.

11

Thanks, yeah I don’t think that one would apply (it would only matter if someone was not paying/filing taxes and the tax office doesn’t react for 5y, it’s not really the same things as saying tax filings are guaranteed to be done in less than 5y).

(And it also apply to at-source equally)

12

This is Switzerland, they don’t think you need the money.

To allow us some perspective, do care to share some details or this isn’t half as interesting…

  • how long you’ve been waiting?
  • what amount are you expecting back?
  • What’s your asset allocation?
  • what do you want to invest/spend the money on?
13

I don’t even know what is the problem :wink: what exactly are we waiting for ?

1 Like
14

I’m thinking instead of going to court themselves, this thread might aim to motivate OTHERS to go to court :thinking:

Though that might be difficult, as most people probably don’t care when they get a couple thousand back a year late, and - even more importantly - wouldn’t spend time, money and reputation arguing about it.

15

I mean technically it is missed opportunity costs no? Yes, they might eventually give you some interest on that amount but not as much as you’d have gotten if this was invested during that time.

Worth hiring a lawyer? Probably I wouldn’t. But I can at least acknowledge it’s annoying, and annoyance is a subjective feeling.

Kind of reminds me of this other thread with the neighbors shoes in the hallway.

16

So OP‘s problem is that past tax returns are not finalised yet?

1 Like
17

Yes, seems they’ve been waiting for more than 3 years for the final tax bill / tax reimbursement after being taxed at source.

And yeah, it is missed opportunity costs unless one accounts for them as bonds/lending in NW and had this kind of investment planned for in one’s asset allocation.

1 Like
18

I see. Now I understand

The issue is that for many years the tax refund is piling up. I think it’s easier to just ask tax office to speed up. Not sure what the lawyer is going to do

19

Disclaimer: I don’t specifically support the practice unless the amount considered is significant (significant meaning it meaningfully impacts my quality of life). That being said:

As stated by @samarama a letter written by a lawyer on their letterhead can go a long way (way further than any registered mail and/or amount of calls/emails from the taxpayer themselves can go) and doesn’t cost that much to get sent. This applies to many aspects of life and not just tax refunds processes: cases where a lawyer might get involved tend to be handled as a priority while those where there’s no meaningful risk for the person/office in charge tend to fall to the bottom of the pile more easily.

The risk I see with that is that, if they don’t follow suit to the lawyer’s letter, I would usually want to follow on it and get further action be taken by the lawyer. It’s a personal choice but I think I would otherwise loose credibility, which is a trait I value highly so I personally always assess if I’m ready and willing to go to the bitter end should it come to that before starting any procedure.

2 Likes