642.21
VSTGLIALIP
CH
CH
Art. 20 Federal Act of October 13, 1965, on Withholding Tax (WTA)
LIA; Chapitre 1 Perception de l’impôt anticipé; B. Obligation fiscale; IV. Déclaration remplaçant le paiement de l’impôt; 2. Pour les revenus de capitaux mobiliers
Art. 20 LIA
If it becomes apparent that the payment of tax on income from movable capital would lead to unnecessary complications or evident hardships, the taxpayer may be authorized to fulfill their tax obligation by declaring the taxable benefit.
The Federal Council specifies the cases in which the declaration procedure is permitted. The declaration procedure must especially be allowed for dividends and appreciable monetary benefits paid within a Swiss or international group.
In the cases referred to in Art. 16, para. 2 bis, let. a and b, the declaration procedure is permitted even if the declaration of the taxable benefit, the request for authorization to use the declaration procedure, or the request for application of the declaration procedure is not submitted within the prescribed deadline.
Court Decisions Applying This Provision (30)
A-2485/2024 (Art. 20 Abs. 1 VStG)
Taxable Benefit Found in Shareholder's Transfer of Patient Base
Relates to the exception for reporting procedures in cases of undue hardship.
A-2485/2024 (Art. 20 Abs. 2 VStG)
Taxable Benefit Found in Shareholder's Transfer of Patient Base
Relates to the cases in which the reporting procedure is permissible.
A/3351/2014 · ge (art. 20 B al. 1 LIP)
Apprentice Exclusion from Vocational Training Upheld in Part Due to Disciplinary Miscalculation
The appellant's behavior was deemed a violation of this provision, which serves as the basis for disciplinary sanctions.
A/1304/2011 · ge (art. 20B al. 1 LIP)
Student Exclusion for Violent Altercations Upheld
Cited as the legal basis defining the scope of misconduct subject to disciplinary intervention and sanctions.
A/1304/2011 · ge (art. 20B al. 3 LIP)
Student Exclusion for Violent Altercations Upheld
Cited to establish the maximum limit for the most severe disciplinary sanctions, relevant to assessing proportionality.
A/1304/2011 · ge (art. 20B al. 4 LIP)
Student Exclusion for Violent Altercations Upheld
Cited to indicate that the State Council determines the different types of possible sanctions.
A/1304/2011 · ge (art. 20C al. 1 LIP)
Student Exclusion for Violent Altercations Upheld
Cited to establish the threshold for when the Disciplinary Council has jurisdiction based on the length of exclusion.
A/1304/2011 · ge (art. 20C al. 7 LIP)
Student Exclusion for Violent Altercations Upheld
Cited to state that the General Secretariat of the Department refers cases to the Disciplinary Council.
A/1304/2011 · ge (art. 20C al. 8 LIP)
Student Exclusion for Violent Altercations Upheld
Cited to confirm that the procedure before the Disciplinary Council is governed by the RECD.
A/151/2011 · ge (art. 20B al. 1 LIP)
Student Exclusion Proportionality Following Foreign Conviction
The court partially admitted the appeal, modifying the sanction imposed based on the legal framework for student conduct violations.
A/2409/2007 · ge (art. 20 et ss de la loi fédérale sur l’impôt anticipé du 13 octobre 1965 (LIA - RS 642.21))
Appeal Against Fine for Attempted Tax Evasion Regarding Undisclosed Share Income
Mentioned in the factual summary as a procedure used by the taxpayer, but not cited in the final orders.
A-4216/2007 (Art. 20 LIA)
Company's Share Sale and Undisclosed Owner Prevent Tax Declaration Payment
Cited as the legal basis for the declaration procedure for mobile capital yields.
A-687/2008 (Art. 20 Abs. 2 VStG)
Company's Tax Assessment Reduced After Initial Non-Cooperation
Cited as the legal basis for requiring specific provisions in the ordinance for notification procedures.
A-687/2008 (Art. 20 VStG)
Company's Tax Assessment Reduced After Initial Non-Cooperation
Cited as the legal basis for allowing tax to be settled by notification in certain cases.
10.2004.117 · ti (art. 20 LIA)
Zoning Revision Not Constituting Material Expropriation Without Established Building Rights
This article concerning urbanization was cited in the reasoning leading to the rejection of the expropriation claim, although not directly in the dispositive orders, it contributes to the finding that the prerequisites for material expropriation were not met (Order 1).