The German Federal Fiscal Court (BFH) recently published two important decisions according to which foreign securities investment funds were discriminated against compared to German investment funds, as far as the non-German investment funds suffered German WHT on German dividends during the time period from 2004 until the end of 2017 (Bundesfinanzhof, decisions I R 1/20 and I R 2/20, both dated 13 March 2024).
Facts of the BFH cases[1]
A French FCP fund had suffered German dividend WHT in the WHT-years 2008 - 2013 (case I R 1/20). The plaintiff asked for a refund of the WHT (15%) plus interest, based on the EU Free Movement of Capital. The BFH agrees that the French fund is entitled to equal treatment with the comparable German investment fund, which would not have suffered the German WHT. In the second decision the reasoning of which is almost identical, a Luxembourg SICAV (S.A.) had suffered German dividend WHT in the WHT-years 2009 - 2013 (case I R 2/20).
The German Federal Fiscal Court (BFH) also decides that the claimant is entitled to interest on the overpaid WHT. While not foreseen in German national tax law, the BFH derives from EU law such direct entitlement of the claimant, especially from the obligation to effectively implement EU rules (effet utile).
The interest period generally starts with the date of the deduction of WHT and ends with the actual refund payment, at least from the WHT-year 2012. For WHT-years before 2012, the interest period starts later, generally six months after the WHT refund application was filed by the fund.
The interest rate has not been decided yet. However, without going into detail here, the BFH indicates that the rate will be between at least 1,8% p.a. and a maximum of 6% p.a.
Impact of the BFH decisions
The two recent decisions named are good news for the foreign investment funds. Their economic impact is that the German fiscal authority will - eventually - have to pay out billions of Euro.
Tax law methodologically, there now are a number of case law items and the tax legal questions seem settled now. In several lines of argument in favor of the plaintiff, the two recent BFH decisions quote the prior CJEU judgement on the discrimination of foreign real estate investment funds by means of German taxation (CJEU dated 27 April 2023, C-537/20, “L-Fund”).
However, the “game is not yet over” for the German tax authority.
First, the details on the applicable interest rate have yet to be decided. The amounts at stake can be substantial.
Second, and operationally important, is the following aspect. Both of the two recent BFH decisions explicitly mention that so far, based on their legal position taken (no discrimination of the foreign investment fund) during the application process, the German Federal Office of Finance (BZSt) and the lower tax court did not investigate the question of whether the WHT reimbursement amounts claimed are correct in purely factual terms, i.e. whether the WHT was actually suffered by the plaintiff under the rules of German national tax law. In the cases at hand, the plaintiffs submitted their own lists of dividends received and WHT paid, i.e. the WHT related facts were not yet subject to review. The BFH points out that this review will now have to be carried out by the German tax authority (lower tax court) without giving further detail in this regard.
Applicant investment funds and their asset managers may wish to discuss how to prepare for such upcoming “beneficial ownership test” and to pursue the existing WHT reclaim applications with their tax advisors …or with the specialists of WTS Global.
[1] For further detail, please allow us to refer to the WTS Global FS Infoletter # 29 of 27 June 2023.
If you would like to discuss this topic, please contact:
WTS Germany
If you have any questions about WTS Global or our global services, please get in touch.
We will respond to you as soon as possible.