Why would broker act not in client’s interest ?
If W8BEN is filled then only 15%WHT is withheld in US.
I doubt there was any malice. Some Swiss brokers, at least in the past, weren’t IRS qualified intermediaries, in which case they couldn’t offer W-8 BEN and were required to always deduct 30% US WHT. Or maybe there was a mistake or miscommunication regarding W-8 BEN. I would also not be surprised if some broker support requests related to US WHT aren’t handled correctly.
Normally you can see the difference on the transaction documents. It should appear as a line for 15% and another line for 15%. Not as a single line for 30%.
2 Likes
Yes, exactly. I didn’t know that, and only figured it out when my tax refund got rejected. There was no way to retroactively fix it, unfortunately.
Wait what? Are they saying that I don’t get WHT back because I’m with IBKR UK?!
USA Rückbehalt ist afaik nur für Schweizerbroker. Du möchtest Anrechnung der ausländischen Quellensteuer.
There’s like 500 threads like this 
That’s the most common mistake people make with DA-1, you should only ask for the supplementary withholding USA if you have a swiss broker.
4 Likes
Yes. Agree R-US only applies for Swiss brokers, but why deny the WHT credit/DA-1?
They always do that when you wrongly ask for supplementary withholding. Now you have to explain to them that you misfiled and only want DA-1 (but isn’t your tax rate way too low to claim it back if you said you didn’t pay any federal tax?)
2 Likes
That was the 2023 year and I didn’t claim there. I received final tax assessments for 2020-2023 yesterday!
It seems in 2 of the years I clicked the R-US box. I must have thought, “I can’t remember if this apples but let’s tick it just in case - worst case is they ignore it.” I was wrong.
I guess you are appealing?
Yes. There was other stuff wrong anyway.
Have you read this?
I assume you made a wrong click for a section where they ask about „ zusätzlichern Steuerrückbehalt USA“
1 Like
I checked my tax declaration 2024. Last 2 pages are DA-1 and RUS (15% each) as I’m using a Swiss broker. That’s correct right?
1 Like
Yes, with a Swiss broker that’s correct. Assuming the broker is an IRS qualified intermediary and W-8 BEN or equivalent has been filed.
(In some cantons, R-US is part of the DA-1 form, in other cantons there are two separate forms).
Can someone help with the German here. How do I say something along the lines of “I agree that the [whatever the thing that R-US claims] is not applicable, however, [whatever the thing that DA-1 claims] applies and is not restricted by the location of the broker. Therefore please amend the tax calcuation to allow the [whatever the thing is called in German]”
Ich stimme der Entscheidung bezüglich [whatever the thing that R-US claims] zu. Allerdings [whatever the thing that DA-1 claims] sind geltend und nicht abhängig von der Lokalität des Broker. Ich bitte sie darum, die geforderten Werte für [whatever the thing is called in German] zuzustimmen.
Maybe.
Fwiw I got the Entscheid and I also did the mistake of claiming my amount twice (I had the same number in both columns). They flat out rejected the R-US which is understandable.
They showed a calculation for DA-1 and as far as I understand it, mine as set to zero because the amount of U.S. dividends I earned in 2024 was lower than the costs I got to deduct. The amount you get paid back is the minimum of 3 figures, one of which looks to be ‘U.S. dividends - deductions’.
It is the Rückzahlungsbetrag: a), b), c) oder d) (where d) seems to be their view of what my view is in a), and these two match). Then c) is the total taxes you will pay for the year and b) is the important one, it is “Maximalbetrag nach Unkosten”. Now it isn’t defined exactly how it is calculated, but it seems to compare the Bruttoertrag (which is the U.S. dividends received in CHF in the tax year) to the Etragsminderung (Unkosten) which is the sum of the Schuldzinsenanteil (Schuldzinsen * Assets declared in DA-1 all divided by total assets) plus the Verwaltungskostenanteil (basically your declared deductions for Vermögensverwalungskosten multiplied by the ratio of your earnings coming from U.S. sources to that of Swiss sources.
Since for me the deducted costs are higher, b) is 0 and I get 0 back. It should be interesting to see what happens next year as the deductions should remain fairly similar, but my U.S. dividends should increase by more than the amount they are lower this year. So next year I will see if they literally just take the Bruttoertrag - Ertragsminderung.
*where total assets is a funny number, it’s higher than the taxable wealth, but lower than assets (ignoring liabilities, i.e. mortgage)
Doesn’t @PhilMongoose also want the things in brackets translated?
As in:
Ich stimme der Entscheidung bezüglich Zusätzlicher Steuerrückbehalt USA zu. Allerdings habe ich Anspruch auf Gutschrift der abgezogenen Quellensteuer & mache dies geltend, da nicht abhängig von der Lokalität des Broker. Ich bitte sie darum, die geforderten Werte für ausländische Quellensteuer zuzustimmen.
1 Like
I thought it says the terms on the document and he just didn’t want to type them off here.