From this table it seems like IE is the best option as there are not withholding taxes. Regarding US, one can claim back only 15%. Regarding CH, it seems like nothing can be claimed back. But maybe I’m wrong 
Everything is reclaimable (if it’s >0%).
For CH you just don’t use the DA-1 form.
This table is only for Tax 2. there is a column saying if tax credit is possible or not. Table says „yes“ for all rows.
But you cannot conclude IE is best. As I mentioned in previous message , there is also Tax 1
Tax 1 depends on two variables
- what’s the domicile of ETF
- What’s the domicile of Underlying companies
Following article might provide some insights
Since there are so many variables at play, you need to be specific about what you want and people can respond with what’s the best domicile for ETF.
At Swissquote or at IBKR?
I don’t remember if someone’s adressed this issue before:
If you’ve maxed out your tax deductions for wealth management (e.g. 0.3% for ZH) and only receive partial WHT refund for VT from the tax office, is there any further options to optimize taxes and/or investment costs?
Is splitting VT into US (e.g. VTI) and ex-US (using UCITS funds) an option?
Yes, if you cannot get back L2 tax you pay on the US distributions in full, it makes sense to keep exUS in the UCITS. Otherwise you get taxed twice.
But you pay for this implicitly by increasing complexity of the portfolio. Maybe worth doing if the portfolio is sufficiently large.
2 Likes
Yes. But you need to find suitable fund that is cheap and has low tracking error and low transaction costs etc etc. for a single fund solution you can look at EXUS and the very new WEXE UCITS
2 Likes
Some amount of home bias as ex-US replacement for example. With a swiss etf on swiss stocks you pay 0% withholding tax + 10% of dividends are tax free capital gains.
1 Like
I am wondering what is causing you to get lower refund?
I know the mortgages can cause issues but what’s your root cause ?
1 Like
@Compounding If you are not afraid to hold many funds to recreate ACWI ex US then you can search following UCITS
ISIN Fund
IE00BK5BQX27 Europe M/L
LU2089238385 Japan M/L
IE00BFXR5W90 Asia Pacific ex Japan M/L (ex CW; Coal; UN Compact)
IE00BKM4GZ66 EM IMI S/M/L
2 Likes
Cheers guys, very much appreciated!
That’s a good question indeed, no mortgage here, I’ll have a closer look at the WHT refund calculation from the tax office and report back asap 
I’d say yes, even with full WHT refund. I’m doing that for some 10 years and haven’t found a better solution, yet.
As for the lower refund, when my refund was denied, I focused so much on alternative that I almost missed the quite obvious error they did in the calculation. So I’d also recommend to start there.
There should be no connection with the wealth management fee, alone. It’s too low to matter under most circumstances if you maxed it out.
1 Like
for ex-US are people using UCITS (which one) and what’s the pros cons of UCITS vs non-UCITS e.g. vanguard?
EXUS is traded in CHF, interesting alternative (however the volume is really poor ).
Volume doesn’t matter tho, as long as there’s market makers and the spread is tight.
2 Likes
finpension has an article about which domicile is the best for Swiss investors:
- US stocks: US
- CH stocks: CH
- European stocks: IE or LU
- EM stocks: IE or LU
4 Likes
I run the following setup (as advised somewhere around the forum):
- US: VTI @ IBKR
- DEV xUS: UBS/Swisscanto @ VIAC/FP (for less hassle with divvies WHT) combo of:
- Europe ex CH
- Japan
- Pacific ex Japan
- Canada
- Switzerland
- EM: IEMG @ IBKR (IIRC due to Korea treatment vs. Vanguard and VIAC/FP )
5 Likes
I understand that when DA-1 is not fully refunded, we should try to optimize. However, while folks try to optimize, I would also recommend to check what would be the absolute advantage of optimization. For smaller portfolios, maybe the absolute amount “saved” would be quite low.
For example -: 100,000 CHF portfolio of WEBG ETF (TER 0.07%) will lose approx 100 CHF per year (after accounting for Tax) on account of US dividends which are lost vs. full power of VT (TER 0.07%)
If the portfolio is 1,000,000 CHF, then it is a different matter.
Just make sure, you do not end up losing the money in transactions costs, higher TER for sub funds, rebalancing etc.
| Assumed dividend for US stocks -: 1.5% | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Portion of US stocks | Effective WHT for US stocks | Marginal Tax rate | Lost dividends | |
| WEBG | 60% | 0.135% | 30% | 0.095% |
| WEBG | 60% | 0.135% | 25% | 0.101% |
| WEBG | 60% | 0.135% | 40% | 0.081% |
5 Likes
To optimize for taxes, 3a needs to be filled with the following prioritized segments (with examples):
- WHT without credit:
- Europe ex CH
- Pacific ex JP
- EM
- No WHT
- US pension fund
- JP pension fund
- CH stocks & domicile
- WHT with credit
- CA stocks & domicile
- (US stocks & domicile)
- (CH stocks & domicile)
- (JP stocks & domicile, but only 10% credit for 15% default WHT)
This rule is disregarding actual rates of capital gains and dividends.
Edit: Some clarification
4 Likes
Could you add the rational, please?
If you pay, e.g. US WHT you get credited, why would you priortize US domicile in 3a?
1 Like