a reserve for the future purchase of a new movable asset of fixed assets (tax break) could also be made subsequently by way of balance changes to the compensation of an audit more profit (BFH, Judgement of 17.06.2010 - III R 43/06, published on 11.17.2010).
Background information on the tax break:
taxpayers could for the future acquisition or construction of a new movable asset of fixed assets form in accordance with the dispute in 1999, as amended in § 7g para 3 sentence 1 of the Income Tax Act a profit-reducing reserve, which could not exceed 50 per cent of the purchase price or production cost of the favored asset. A further condition the tax break was that the taxpayer expected to acquire the asset by the end of the second to the formation of the reserve the following marketing year, or will produce.
The BFH writes:
The establishment of a reserve is in accordance with § 7g para 3 et seq aF Income Tax Act to the time-unlimited voting rights, formally grds. Admission to the finality of those tax assessment to be carried may, upon which they modify. Material, the reserve, however, requires a financial relationship between the investment and the creation of reserves. In this financial context, it is missing when the reserve is established for more than two years after the investment. This period of two years is exactly to the day to calculate, therefore, not end until the end of the second calendar year following the calendar year of acquisition of the asset. That the taxpayer by § 7g para 3 sentence 1 of the Income Tax Act aF granted (balance sheet) approach is not already vote by the appropriate certificate in the records or exercised by notice to the tax administration, but due to the presentation a corresponding liability in the commercial and tax balance sheet. Only the identity of the reserve in the balance sheet reveals the exercise of the accounting option with the necessary clarity. The claimant has the dispute a copy of the amended financial statements for the dispute in 1999 first presented in December 2003 during the fiscal court, the underlying booking was made in November 2003. Since that time had passed since the purchase more than two years, there was no dispute in relation to the financing and investment between Ansparrücklage. Was the creation of reserves excluded material, so could the - on the merits permitted - Annual change not be made.
Note
The tax break under § 7g aF was transformed by the Business Tax Reform Act of 2008, the investment deduction amount under § 7g in the current version of the Law (on transitional arrangements see § 52 § 23 ITA). The ruling is also applicable for the 2007 investment tax amount of importance. Although the investment is not deductible amount of the more difficult way from the implementation of a balance change because it is made outside the balance sheet, and thus avoids both the discrimination balancing final against taxpayers net income method. A financial context, but after still required. In this financial context, but there is under § 7g nF, if the deduction amount is not raised until after the end of the now present three-year investment period.
source: BFH online
0 comments:
Post a Comment