Form over substance or substance over form?

The taxpayer is a lawyer. He is a partner in two partnerships in Liechtenstein. The first is a law firm, the second oversees three fiduciaries, all organised as Anstalten. As a self-employed person, his tax return indicates that the income derived from these two activities is taxable in Liechtenstein and not at his domicile.

The tax authorities admit that the activity of a lawyer is indeed independent (taxable at the place of practice), whereas the other activity is classified as dependent (taxable at domicile).

Federal judges remind that dependent or independent status is not determined by the parties' stated intention, but by the reality of how the activity is carried out (para. 2.1. i.f.).

Federal judges find that the simple company holding the three trusts has no operational activity. The operational activities are carried out at the level of the trusts themselves. The role of partner in the simple company allows for holding positions as bodies within the trusts: board of directors, management committee, manager, etc. The activity within the trusts cannot be attributed to the activity of a lawyer either (cf. 3.2).

Federal judges are looking into the quality of an 'anstalt'. This is a legal person. They recall the conditions under which a legal person can be treated transparently. Transparency, according to constant jurisprudence, cannot, however, be invoked by the taxpayer for their own benefit (cons. 4.3).

The judgment is in German. It concerns a St. Gallen case.

Federal Tribunal, judgment 9C_647/2024, of 27 January 2026