
Switzerland Opens Consultation for Applying OECD GIR Provisions
On April 30, 2025, the Swiss Federal Council issued a proposal to amend the Minimum Tax Ordinance to provide for the OECD GIR provisions, as well as some other small amendments.
The allocable share is defined in Article 2.2.1 of the OECD Model Rules as:
Top-Up Tax of the Low Taxed Entity x Parents Inclusion Ratio
The inclusion ratio is the:
Pillar Two GloBE Income of the Low Taxed Entity less any amount attributable to other ownership interests/Pillar Two GloBE Income of the Low Taxed Entity
This means that if the low-taxed entity is wholly owned by the parent entity, the inclusion ratio would be 100% and all of the low-taxed entity’s top-up tax would be levied on the parent under an Income Inclusion Rule (IIR).
A key component of the IIR calculation is ascertaining the amount of Pillar Two GloBE income attributable to other owners. This then feeds directly into a parent entity’s allocable share, and the amount of top-up tax they are liable to pay.
The way the Pillar Two GloBE rules do this is in Article 2.2.3 of the OECD Model Rules, by deeming consolidated financial accounts to be prepared. As part of the accounting consolidation, any income or assets attributable to other non-group owners would be eliminated so that the consolidated accounts reflect just the income, expenses, assets and liabilities of the group.
In order to do this, they make a number of assumptions so that the hypothetical consolidation actually achieves the correct allocation of Pillar Two GloBE income:
1. The accounting standard used for the deemed consolidation is the same as the UPE’s consolidated financial statements.
2. The parent entity owned a controlling interest in the low-taxed entity and there is a requirement to consolidate the results of the low-taxed entity in the deemed consolidated accounts.
This is an assumption to fit the Pillar Two GloBE rules to accounting rules (even if the accounting consolidation is only hypothetical). Just because the Ultimate Parent Entity (UPE) may have to prepare consolidated accounts doesn’t mean that a parent entity would.
The parent entity may for instance hold a minority interest in the low-taxed entity even though the UPE holds a controlling interest. This would then mean there may not be a requirement for the parent entity to prepare consolidated accounts. This assumption prevents that from happening.
3. Consolidated financial accounts eliminate intra-group transactions.
However, for the purposes of the Pillar Two GloBE rules intra-group transactions are usually included (unless of course an election is made for consolidated treatment for constituent entities in the same jurisdiction. For more information on this, see the Consolidation Election).
An assumption is therefore made that all transactions are with non-group companies. This prevents the hypothetical consolidation from eliminating intra-group transactions.
4. The final assumption removes all other owners from the deemed consolidation (by treating them as non-group companies) so that the deemed consolidation focuses on the interest held by the parent entity.
Where there are two or more parent entities in a chain required to apply an IIR, a backstop mechanism applies so that the parent entity higher in the chain can reduce its top-up tax by the amount of its top-up tax levied in the intermediate holding company or POPE.
This would not apply if for instance there was a POPE that wholly-owned another POPE which in turn owned an interest in a low-taxed entity, as in this case the POPE highest in the chain has priority. But if the subsidiary POPE was not wholly-owned, both POPEs would have to apply an IIR.
This rule prevents double taxation. It could also occur where an intermediate parent entity had a non-controlling interest in another intermediate parent entity that in turn holds the ownership interest in a low-taxed entity.
A UPE is resident in Country A. Country A does not apply an IIR.
The UPE owns 100% of Company 1 and 70% of Company 2. The remaining 30% of Company 2 is owned by Company 1. Both Companies are resident in Country B, which does apply an IIR.
Company 1 owns 25% of Company 3 and Company 2 owns 75% of Company 3. Company 3 is resident in Country C. Company 3 is a low tax entity and top-up tax of 10,000,000 euros is due under the Pillar Two GloBE rules.
The two intermediate parent entities are Company 1 and Company 2. If Company 1 owned a controlling interest in Company 2, Company 1 would just apply the IIR.
However, in this case, it does not. Therefore, both Company 1 and Company 2 apply the IIR on their allocable share of the top-up tax. Company 2’s allocable share would be 75%, equivalent to 7,500,000 euros. Company 1’s allocable share would be the 25% direct ownership and 22.5% indirect ownership ie 47.5%.
This would equate to top-up tax of 4,750,000. However, Company 1 can reduce its allocated top-up tax by the amount of top-up tax attributed to its indirect ownership (2,250,000 euros). This leaves Company 1 with allocated top-up tax of 2,500,000 euros.
A UPE is resident in Country A. The UPE owns 60% of Company 2, resident in Country C.
The UPE owns 70% of Company 1 which is resident in Country B. The remaining 30% is owned by non-group members. Company 1 owns the remaining 40% of Company 2.
Company 2 is a low-taxed entity for Pillar Two GloBE purposes.
Both Country A and B apply an IIR.
In this case Company 1 is a POPE as it owns an interest in another constituent entity (Company 2) and more than 20% of its ownership interest is held by non-group members. As such Company 1 is required to apply an IIR.
The UPE is also required to apply an IIR. However, the top-up tax allocated to the UPE is reduced by the amount attributed to the POPE due to its indirect ownership.
For instance, if the top-up tax due in Company 2 was 50,000,000 euros, Company 1 would be allocated top-up tax of 20,000,000 euros (50,000,000 * 40%). The UPE has 60% direct ownership and 28% indirect ownership. Therefore, it would be initially allocated 88% of the top-up tax (44,000,000).
This would then be reduced by the top-up tax allocated to Company 1 due to its indirect ownership (28% * 50,000,000 = 14,000,000 euros).
The final allocation of top-up tax to the UPE would be 30,000,000 euros.
On April 30, 2025, the Swiss Federal Council issued a proposal to amend the Minimum Tax Ordinance to provide for the OECD GIR provisions, as well as some other small amendments.
On March 31, 2025, Japan enacted Cabinet Order No. 121 of 2025 and Ministry of Finance Ordinance No. 19 of 2025 to provide further details on the application of Japan’s QDMTT from April 1, 2026.
In April 2025, the Hong Kong Government proposed a number of Committee Stage Amendments to the Inland Revenue (Amendment) (Minimum Tax for Multinational Enterprise Groups) Bill 2024. This includes amendments for the January 2025 and June 2024 OECD Administrative Guidance.
South Korea’s amendment to the Enforcement Decree No. 35348 of February 28, 2025 and the Decree of the Ministry of Economy and Finance No. 1114 of March 21, 2025 provide for further aspects of the June 2024 OECD Administrative Guidance as well as additional top-up tax forms.
Updates to our ‘OECD Administrative Guidance: Domestic Implementation Matrix’ to reflect the latest April 2025 Pillar 2 updates for the UAE and Poland.
On April 7, 2025, the Polish Ministry of Finance released details for a draft bill to amend the Minimum Tax Act. The amendments are primarily to implement the June 2024 and January 2025 OECD Administrative Guidance.
On April 16, 2025, the Ministry of Finance issued Ministerial Decision No. (88) of 2025 to provide for the application of the OECD Administrative Guidance from January 1, 2025.
The UTPR exclusion for MNEs in their initial phase of international activity does not need to be included in a QDMTT, however, it can be included. In this article we look at the different jurisdictional approaches.
On January 15, 2025, the OECD issued Administrative Guidance that includes a list of jurisdictions that have transitional qualified status for the purposes of the income inclusion rule and domestic minimum tax (including the QDMTT Safe Harbour). This was subsequently updated on March 31, 2025.
Cookie | Duration | Description |
---|---|---|
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics". |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional | 11 months | The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional". |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary". |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other. |
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance | 11 months | This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance". |
viewed_cookie_policy | 11 months | The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data. |