EU conflict minerals legislation

EU conflict minerals legislation will enter into force on 7 July 2017 and affect all EU importers of gold, tin, tungsten and tantalum (metals and ores).

The new EU conflict minerals regulation (“CMR”) was officially published on 9 May 2017 and will enter into force on 7 July 2017. The CMR introduces new compliance rules for EU importers of gold, tin, tungsten and tantalum, as well as their ores (“metals and minerals”), which stem from conflict-affected and high-risk areas, among others. The CMR is based on the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for responsible supply chains of minerals from conflict-affected and high-risk areas (“OECD Due Diligence Guidance”), including the annexes and supplements thereto. The USA have already introduced their version of a conflict minerals regulation in Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act. This memorandum provides an overview of the key features of the CRM.


The EU Conflicts Minerals Regulation covers gold, tin, tungsten and tantalum, as well as their ores, which stem from conflict-affected or high-risk areas, among others. The CMR will affect all EU importers (or third parties acting on their behalf) of gold, tin, tungsten and tantalum, and those involved in the EU supply chain of the import of these metals and minerals. EU importers or third parties acting on their behalf must comply with the following key obligations: the creation of management and risk management systems, third party audits, disclosure obligations and ex-post checks. Non-EU importers must ensure that EU importers can fulfil their obligations by providing the required information and data for supply chain traceability. The CMR will enter into force on 7 July 2017. Its key obligations will however only come into effect on 1 January 2021.

Who is affected?

The obligations of the CMR will mainly affect EU importers of metals and minerals. An “EU Importer” is any natural or legal person declaring metals or minerals for release for free circulation, or any natural or legal person on whose behalf such declaration is made. Non-EU goods intended to be put on the EU market or intended for private use or consumption within the customs territory of the EU shall be placed under release for free circulation. Release for free circulation entails:

  1. the collection of any import duties due
  2. the collection, as appropriate, of other charges, as provided for under relevant and effective provisions relating to the collection of such charges
  3. the application of commercial policy measures and prohibitions and restrictions insofar as they do not have to be applied at an earlier stage
  4. the completion of other formalities established in respect of the import of goods.

Release for free circulation shall confer the customs status of EU goods on non-EU goods.

It is important to note, however, that EU importers sourcing metals and minerals not stemming from areas deemed to be “conflict-affected or high-risk” must maintain their responsibility to comply with the due diligence obligations of the CMR. In other words, all EU importer of metals and minerals must comply with the requirements of the CMR. Commodities traders who are not EU importers of metals and minerals are still affected by the CMR because they are part of the supply chain. These traders must ensure that EU importers can fulfil their traceability obligations and other duties under the CMR.

Which metals and minerals are affected?

The CMR impacts gold, tin, tungsten and tantalum and their ores (“metals and minerals”) if they exceed a certain threshold volume. EU authorities have outlined the affected metals and minerals in their “Combined Customs Nomenclature”. Please find below an indicative table of the affected CN codes and exempted volumes.

Affected minerals

Description EU CN code TARIC subdivision Exempted threshold volume (kg)
Tin ores and concentrates 2609 00 00 5,000
Tungsten ores and concentrates 2611 00 00 250,000
Tantalum or niobium ores and concentrates ex 2615 90 00 10 To be communicated
Gold ores and concentrates ex 2616 90 00 10 To be communicated
Gold, unwrought or in semi-manufactured form, or as a powder with a gold concentration lower than 99.5% that has not passed the refining stage ex 7108 100

Affected metals

Description CN code TARIC subdivision Threshold volume (kg)
Tungsten oxides and hydroxides 2825 90 40 100,000
Tin oxides and hydroxides ex 2825 90 85 10 To be communicated
Tin chlorides 2827 39 10 10,000
Tungstates 2841 80 00 100,000
Tantalates ex 2841 90 85 30 To be communicated
Carbides of tungsten 2849 90 30 10,000
Carbides of tantalum ex 2849 90 50 10 To be communicated
Gold, unwrought or in semi-manufactured form, or as a powder with a gold concentration of 99.5% or higher that has passed the refining stage ex 7108 100
Ferrotungsten and ferro-silico-tungsten 7202 80 00 25,000
Tin, unwrought 8001 100,000
Tin bars, rods, profiles and wires 8003 00 00 1,400
Tin, other articles 8007 00 2,100
Tungsten, powders 8101 10 00 2,500
Tungsten, unwrought, including bars and rods obtained by simple sintering 8101 94 00 500
Tungsten wire 8101 96 00 250
Tungsten bars and rods, other than those obtained by simple sintering, profiles, plates, sheets, strips and foil, and other 8101 99 350
Tantalum, unwrought including bars and rods, obtained by simple sintering; powders 8103 20 00 2,500
Tantalum bars and rods, other than those obtained by simple sintering, profiles, wire, plates, sheets, strips and foil, and other

 Which jurisdictions are concerned?

The CMR will affect all metals and minerals coming from areas in a state of armed conflict or fragile post conflict, as well as those areas witnessing weak or non-existent governance and security (such as failed states) and widespread and systematic violations of international law, including human rights abuses. It will be left to the discretion of the respective EU importer whether areas should be deemed “conflict-affected” or “high-risk”. An indicative, non-exhaustive, regularly updated list of conflict-affected and high-risk areas will be provided. This list will however not provide absolute clarity on the countries that are considered “conflict-affected” or “high-risk”. The authorities will prepare non-binding guidelines in the form of a handbook for economic operators, explaining how best to apply the criteria for the identification of conflict-affected and high-risk areas.

What are the obligations under the EU conflict minerals regulation?

EU importers of metals and minerals must comply with the supply chain due diligence obligations set out in the CMR, and keep documentation demonstrating their compliance with these obligations, including the results of independent third-party audits. The key obligations are the implementation of:

  1. Management system: A supply-chain policy for metals and minerals stemming from conflict-affected and high-risk areas must be created, adopted and overseen by senior management, and communicated to suppliers. A grievance mechanism as an early-warning risk-awareness system must also be implemented. A chain-of-custody or supply-chain traceability system must be developed that provides the following (and its respective documentation):
      • description of the metal or mineral, including its trade name and type
      • name and address of the supplier to the EU importer
      • name and address of the smelters and refiners in the supply chain of the EU importer
      • in the case of metals – records of the third-party audit reports of smelters and refiners, if available, or evidence of conformity with a supply chain due diligence scheme recognised by the European Commission
      • in the case of minerals only – the country of origin of the minerals and if available, the quantities and dates of extraction, expressed in volume or weight
      • in the case of metals or minerals originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas – additional information in accordance with the specific recommendations for upstream economic operators, as outlined in the OECD Due Diligence Guidance.


  2. Risk management obligations: Identify and assess the risks of adverse impacts in the mineral supply chain on the basis of information provided on the standards of their supply chain policy. Implement a strategy to respond to identified risks, one that prevents or mitigates adverse impacts by:
    • reporting findings of the supply chain risk assessment to senior management
    • adopting risk management measures consistent with the OECD Due Diligence Guidance
    • implementing a risk management plan and tracking its performance
    • undertaking additional fact and risk assessments for risks requiring mitigation, or after a change of circumstances.


  3. Third party audit obligations: EU importers of metals or minerals shall have audits performed by an independent third party (‘third-party audit’). EU importers of metals shall be exempt from the obligation to carry out third-party audits provided they provide substantive evidence, including third-party audit reports, which demonstrate that all smelters and refiners in their supply chain comply with the CMR or that they source exclusively from smelters and refiners found on the “Globally-Responsible Smelters and Refiners” list (see below, “Acknowledged refiners and smelters”).
  4. Disclosure obligations: EU importers of metals and minerals shall provide reports of any third-party audits to the competent authorities, and provide their immediate downstream purchasers all information gained and maintained pursuant to their supply chain due diligence with regard to business confidentiality and other competitive concerns. Each year, they shall report as thoroughly as possible on their supply chain due diligence policies and practices for responsible sourcing, including on the Internet.
  5. Ex-post checks: The competent authorities will carry out appropriate ex-post checks in order to ensure that EU importers of metals and minerals comply with the established obligations. This includes the examination of the EU importer’s implementation of supply chain due diligence obligations, the examination of documentation and records demonstrating proper compliance and the verification of audit obligations. Ex-post checks will include on-the-spot inspections, such as those done on the premises of the EU importer.

What are the applicable exemptions?

There are multiple applicable exemptions, such as:

  1. Recycled metals: Where an EU importer can reasonably conclude that metals are derived only from recycled or scrap sources, and when it has, with due regard for business confidentiality and other competitive concerns, publicly disclosed its conclusion and described in reasonable detail the supply chain due diligence measures it exercised in reaching that conclusion.
  2. Stocks of affected minerals: When stocks were created in their current form on a verifiable date prior to 1 February 2013.
  3. Recognised due diligence schemes of industry associations and groups: Industry associations and groups may request recognition of their due diligence schemes from the European Commission.
  4. Acknowledged refiners and smelters: A list will be provided that contains the names and addresses of globally-responsible smelters and refiners.

When will the EU conflict minerals regulation and its obligations take effect?

The CMR will take effect on 9 July 2017. Its key provisions will however only enter into force on 1 January 2021. These key provisions are:

  • Compliance with supply chain obligations
  • Management systems obligations
  • Risk management obligations
  • Third-party audit obligations
  • Disclosure obligations
  • Ex-post checks on EU importers

What will be the impact?

The experience obtained from the enforcement of the conflict minerals regulations under Dodd-Frank has shown that it will take a considerable amount of time to plan, structure and implement the requirements set forth in the OECD Due Diligence Guidance. These requirements will affect corporate governance, risk management, supply chain and trading activities.

Please contact our experts on this topic for a free consultation.


Martin Liebi
Director – Head of Commodities Trading Regulation
Tel: +41 58 792 2886

Guenther Dobrauz
Partner Tax and Legals
Tel: +41 58 792 1497

MIFID2: Are you ready for the new era in record-keeping?

With the MIFID2 regulatory regime beginning on 3 January 2018, EU-based financial firms will not only face a new era of heightened record-keeping involving many more records than was previously required, but also the negative effects of new oversight, monitoring, e-discovery and forensics processes for the firm’s clients and regulators. MIFID2 recordkeeping will not just be about expanded content archival – it will deal with its implementation in a way that will help firms best execute processes in a strategic and efficient manner.

The task faced by management teams to ensure their firms are compliant with MIFID2 record-keeping may be daunting given the complexities of the directive and its regulations. We feel this task is best completed by way of an overall approach to record-keeping operations, culminating in the decision to create a firm-level “programme” that is designed to handle all the new requirements posed by MIFID2 – as opposed to ad-hoc, tactically focused processes, which ensure minimal compliance with great risk and little preparation for the processes of oversight, monitoring, e-discovery and forensics. With a strategic programme, firms will have the means to ensure record-keeping compliance and be prepared to effectively deal with the negative effects of MIFID2.

Ultimately, a robust and strategic recordkeeping programme should encompass a process of integrating content archiving into the management of line-of-business applications from the very first day of MIFID2. This process should put operational archiving best practices into place to ensure that records are archived in such a way that their state and inventory are always known – thus making oversight, searching and retrieval easier in the future.

Read the whole article

Contacts PwC:

Guenther Dobrauz
Partner|Leader PwC Legal Services Switzerland
Tel. +41 58 792 1497

Michael Taschner
Senior Manager|Legal FS Regulatory and Compliance Service
Tel. +41 58 792 1087

Philipp Rosenauer
Manager|Legal FS Regulatory and Compliance Services
Tel. +41 58 792 1856

Orkan Sahin
Senior |Legal FS Regulatory and Compliance Services
Tel. +41 58 792 1994

Contacts KSF Technologies:

Michael Imfeld
Managing Partner, Business Development

Allen Frasier
Director of Compliance

Swiss Withholding Tax Refund on Equity Finance Transactions: New Decision of the Federal Supreme Court

On 5 April 2017, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court issued a new decision concerning the Swiss withholding tax refund right of an Italian bank that was engaged in a combination of buy-sell and derivatives transactions with shares of Swiss issuers around dividend payment dates. To a large extent, the decision of the Court concentrated on the evaluation of taxpayers’ compliance with the concept of beneficial ownership requirements aimed at assessing whether relevant transactions entered into by the taxpayer constituted the mere setup of a dividend stripping. Subsequently, the Court denied Swiss withholding tax refund claims due to the failure of the taxpayer to provide the Federal Tax Authorities (“FTA”) with the required information for the identification of the counterparties to the relevant trades, considering this a failure of the taxpayer to cooperate since such information is, in the view of the Court (and of the FTA), an essential element of proof within beneficial ownership testing.

Previous jurisprudence

The judgment represents the further evolution of previous cases delivered by the Federal Supreme Court in similar situations, and in particular, with regard to two Swiss withholding tax refund lead cases dealing with Danish Banks (for further details, please see the following blog posts).

Decision of the Federal Supreme Court of 5 April 2017

Relevant facts:

A bank incorporated in Italy entered into a number of buy/sell and derivatives transactions (futures) with Swiss shares. The bank acquired these securities shortly before the dividend payment date and sold them shortly after the dividend receipt. Further to the dividend payments, the Italian bank filed several withholding tax refund requests with the FTA regarding dividends distributions arising from securities held on ex-dividend dates. While the claims were under consideration, the FTA requested the bank provide additional information regarding the transactions, and in particular, to disclose information enabling the identification of the counterparties to the transactions with underlying securities prior and post the dividend payment event.

Because the Italian bank was unable to provide this information, the FTA and the Federal Administrative Court rejected its Swiss withholding tax refund claims.

Federal Supreme Court decision highlights:

In its decision, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court reiterated its jurisprudence regarding the concept of beneficial ownership, and provided the following arguments:

  • The Federal Supreme Court re-established that Swiss withholding tax refund claim eligibility in the context of the application of a double taxation treaty requires that the claimant be the beneficial owner of the underlying income.
  • To qualify as a beneficial owner of income (a dividend in the case in question), the recipient should be free in determining further faith of income received (this means that the taxpayer should not have any contractual or legal obligation to pass on such income to third parties). The notion of beneficial ownership should be considered while taking into account economic circumstances and not just pure tax reasons (such as the attempt of the recipient of the dividend to benefit from a double tax treaty withholding tax reduction). Consequently, the Court mentioned that although the tax savings is effectively not present, this is not relevant for the double tax treaty eligibility analysis, which precluded the line of reasoning that all counterparties involved in the transaction were residing in treaty countries with the same residual Swiss withholding tax rate under the relevant treaty with Switzerland.
  • Moreover, the Federal Supreme Court recalled that Swiss Tax Law imposes information-sharing and cooperation duty on taxpayers. This duty should apply both to resident and non-resident taxpayers, even if the double tax treaty does not have a specific provision in this respect. The Court stated that during the procedure, the FTA may request information and documentation enabling it to appropriately review and assess a Swiss WHT refund claim. The rules are that the requested evidence must not be obviously inappropriate to make the required assessment (i.e., it must be reasonable and offer suitable proof) and should not result in disproportionate costs for the claimant. The absence of cooperation cannot create a comparative benefit for the taxpayer, and will have negative consequences if the case cannot be properly reviewed and assessed by the authorities.
  • The Federal Supreme Court also stated that brokers used in equity finance transactions will not be recognized as counterparties but only as intermediaries, and that it is the claimant’s duty to provide proof of the effective counterparty behind the broker.

After analysing the facts of the case, the Court found that:

  • The taxpayer could not establish its compliance with Swiss beneficial ownership requirements for double tax treaty benefits application purposes just by providing the names of the counterparties effectively involved in the transactions.
  • The FTA may request information and documentation to make a proper assessment of the facts and circumstances of the transaction which resulted in a Swiss WHT claim. The claimant must provide reasonable documentation as part of his information and cooperation duties. These duties are limited by the principle of proportionality, which means that the requested information should neither be obviously inappropriate to make the required assessment nor result in disproportionate costs for the claimant. Of course, these principles are open for legal interpretation and subject to scrutiny.
  • Moreover, the Court ruled that, by not providing the requested information, the Italian bank deliberately hid essential elements of the facts required for the analysis of its transactions by the authorities, meaning non-cooperation was in fact established. Without the documentation by the claimant, the FTA was put in a position where it was impossible to understand the effective flows and structure, or to analyse the claim against the practice established by the Court. Hence, the claimant was forced to face the consequences of the missing proof of its tax mitigating elements.

Further to the above, the Federal Supreme Court concluded that the withholding tax refund should be denied to the Italian bank (only a non-material claim was sent back to the tax authorities for reassessment due to violation of the formal requirements of the procedure).

What does it mean for you?

The new Court decision clearly shows, in line with previous jurisprudence, an overall trend for assessing compliance with beneficial ownership requirements, and for the detailed review of relevant documentation when withholding tax refund claims are filed within the scope of financial services industry transactions. Market participants using brokers in similar transactions will be required to disclose the effective parties behind the broker, which will in practice make it difficult to establish proof.

The recent jurisprudence makes it clear that all cases should be analysed on the basis of individual facts and circumstances, and that outcomes may vary depending on the analysis of transactions.

We encourage you to review present and previous withholding tax claims filed for similar transactions to determine whether any risks are present, and to develop and implement risk mitigating strategies for the future.

Martin Büeler
Partner, Tax & Legal
+41 58 792 43 92
Luca Poggioli
Director, Corporate Tax
+41 58 792 44 51
Victor Meyer
Partner, Tax & Legal
+41 58 792 43 40
Dieter Wirth
Partner, Tax & Legal
+41 58 792 44 88
Dmitri Deniskin
Director, Tax & Legal
+41 58 792 8258

Are public projects doomed to failure from the start? – Transformation Assurance

Public projects have a bad reputation. Is it deserved, or more a matter of expectations and the way success and failure are defined? In this critical review we take a close look at what makes public-sector IT and transformation projects different from those in other areas, the specific challenges they face, and tried-and-tested approaches to making them a success. Read more…


Marc Lahmann
Director and Leader Transformation Assurance
+41 58 792 27 99

SWIFT Customer Security Programme – mandatory specifications to protect your local SWIFT infrastructures

The growing number of cyber-attacks, including those on the local infrastructures of SWIFT participants, has prompted SWIFT to create a security programme for its participants in order to fight together against cyber threats.

SWIFT published its Customer Security Programme in April 2017. It defines specific requirements to be met by all connected participants. The programme aims to improve the exchange of information within the SWIFT community, to ensure a high level of security for the local SWIFT infrastructure of participants, and to put in place an assurance framework to counter the ever growing number of cyber threats and strengthen the ability of SWIFT participants to combat cyber-attacks.

SWIFT Customer Security Programme

The programme calls upon all SWIFT participants to implement a control and assurance framework. The control framework consists of a set of 16 mandatory and 11 advisory security controls. The controls are based on existing SWIFT security guidelines, and are in line with good practice standards such as NIST, ISO/IEC 27002 and PCI-DSS. The mandatory controls establish a security baseline for the entire SWIFT community. SWIFT also recommends implementing the advisory controls to provide optimal protection for local SWIFT infrastructures.

Demands placed on SWIFT participants

The SWIFT Customer Security Programme will come into force on 1 January 2018. As well as applying to financial service providers, it is also valid for all companies that participate in the SWIFT network. Before the introduction of the programme, each SWIFT participant must conduct a self-assessment and notify SWIFT of its status regarding compliance with the controls (by the end of 2017). From 2018, all participants must confirm their compliance with controls on an annual basis. This confirmation can be provided via a self-assessment (self-attestation), internal audit (self-inspection) or external audit (third-party inspection). Participants are free to choose the type of confirmation they wish to submit. SWIFT will however also carry out regular spot checks of confirmations via internal or external audits for quality assurance purposes.

SWIFT participants must consider the following points in particular:

  • Should only the mandatory controls be implemented, or also the advisory ones?
  • How should the assurance framework be structured? Is self-assessment sufficient, or should an internal or external audit be conducted on a regular basis?
  • Should the status regarding compliance with controls be made public to other SWIFT participants?
  • How can it be ensured that controls continue to be adhered to in the future?

The support we offer you

SWIFT Readiness Assessment

We can help make sure you comply with the SWIFT requirements by 1 January 2018 by assessing your current status and highlighting any gaps.

SWIFT control support

We can provide support for the implementation of controls by means of a post-implementation review.

SWIFT compliance confirmation

We can assist you with your annual confirmation of compliance with SWIFT requirements.

Please feel free to contact our experts if you are interested in the topic.

More information


Jens Probst
Director, Systems & Process
+41 58 792 29 59

Claudia Hösli
Senior Manager, Specialist Cyber Security
+41 58 792 14 85

Marco Schurtenberger
Senior Manager, Specialist Cyber Security
+41 58 792 22 33

Switzerland: New social security treaty between Switzerland and China

A social security treaty between Switzerland and the People’s Republic of China (China) will enter into force on 19 June 2017. The maximum posting period is 72 months. For the duration of the posting employees (regardless their nationality) are exempt from the compulsory insurance obligations of the country of occupation which are covered in the social security treaty. As from 19 June 2017 it will be possible to obtain a Certificate of Coverage.


Click here for more details



Véronique Schaller
+41 58 792 5036

Natalia Graf
+41 58 792 4324


Webinar: How US tax reform impacts Switzerland

Wednesday, 3 May 2017, 4–5pm CET

US tax reform is one of the key topics in the US under the Trump administration. Various proposals are being discussed and prepared − notably measures with the common goal of making the US corporate tax system more competitive. Given the potential magnitude of the proposed changes and the short timeframe within which legal changes are usually implemented in the US, it’s time to consider what US tax reform could mean for Switzerland and Swiss-based companies that do business in the US.

This webinar addresses questions such as:

  • How is the US tax system unique?
  • What’s involved in the process of transforming tax reform into US law?
  • What are the options for tax reform, and how do they compare and contrast (Camp plan, Trump proposal, Republican blueprint)?
  • What are the consequences for Swiss companies doing business in the US (e.g. interest deducibility, treatment of intangibles, state taxes and border adjustment tax)?
  • What impact will US tax reform have on the Swiss tax reform?

To register for the online event, please click on the link below.


Once you have registered, you will receive the WebEx access details. The WebEx will be recorded and you will receive a link to the recording via e-mail after the event using the same details. There will be time for questions and answers with your speakers during the WebEx. Questions can also be sent in advance of the WebeX session to the following email address:

We do hope that you will join us online!

If you have questions, please contact your usual PwC contact person or one of our US tax experts named below.

Matina M. Walt
Swiss Tax Desk
PwC New York / Switzerland

Bernard Moens


Event series − VAT in ERP systems: how does it challenge IT, the Tax Administration and tax experts?

Register Online to our upcoming series of events on VAT in ERP systems: how does it challenge IT, the Tax Administration and tax experts?

ERP systems are often not equipped to handle the complex requirements of VAT correctly, flexibly and efficiently without extra work or manual intervention.

The legal requirements are constantly changing, and on the basis of the OECD guidelines many countries are exchanging data or demanding evermore detailed information from taxpayers. Organisations are well on the way to transparency.

At these events we’ll be discussing the views of our clients, looking at the different needs of the IT and tax functions, and finally sharing some insights from the Tax Administration.

The aim of the events is to talk about experiences and needs, learn from each other, and build ‘best practice’ together. If required this dialogue can be continued afterwards within our “ITX ERP Support Community”. In the beginning, the questions and the coordination of the same language in the cooperation of the tax and IT department are at the company’s disposal. Our discussions will revolve around the issues that organisations face and creating a common language enabling the tax and IT functions to work together.

Have we piqued your interest? We look forward to welcoming you to one of our discussions.

The dates are planned as follows:


  • Wednesday, 31 May 2017, 4.30 pm registration / welcome drink
  • 5.00 pm start, 6.00 pm end, followed by an apéro and individual discussions and questions
  • PricewaterhouseCoopers AG, Birchstrasse 160, 8050 Zurich


  • Tuesday, 6 June 2017, 4.30 pm registration / welcome drink
  • 5.00 pm start, 6.00 pm end, followed by an apéro and individual discussions and questions
  • PricewaterhouseCoopers AG, Bahnhofplatz 10, 3001 Berne


  • Thursday, 15 June 2017, 4.30 pm registration / welcome drink
  • 5.00 pm start, 6.00 pm end, followed by an apéro and individual discussions and questions
  • PricewaterhouseCoopers AG, Avenue Giuseppe-Motta 50, 1211 Geneva
  • This event takes place in English. To discuss your questions, local PwC colleagues will be at your disposal


  • Thursday, 22 June 2017, 4.30 pm registration / welcome drink
  • 5.00 pm start, 6.00 pm end, followed by an apéro and individual discussions and questions
  • PricewaterhouseCoopers AG, St.Jakobs-Strasse 25, 4002 Basel

The detailed programme has been published on our website We are looking forward to your registration.

If you have any questions, please get in touch with your usual PwC contact person or one of the experts below

Your contacts

Ilona Paakkala
ITX Technology Leader
Tel. +41 58 792 42 58

Sandra Wirz
Senior Manager
ITX ERP Support Responsible
Tel. +41 58 792 25 32

Adapt your SAP authorisation concept to S/4HANA

S/4HANA is SAP’s next-generation business suite that is built on SAP’s proprietary operational database system and in-memory computing platform called SAP HANA. S/4HANA is intended to be easier to use and administer while helping to solve more complex problems and handle vastly larger amounts of data than ist predecessors. S/4HANA is available in on-premises, cloud and hybrid deployment models.

With the release of S/4HANA SAP consolidates the integration and harmonisation of functionalities and processes and further reduces barriers between SAP modules facilitating system integration. New technologies, such as Fiori, enhance the user interface for both desktop and mobile devices. The in-memory HANA database lets you collect, store, and process high volumes of operational and transactional data in real time.

Implementation of S/4HANA will affect your current environment, and not just technologywise because processes are also subject to change. Both – the new technology and the change in processes – will result in new requirements for your current authorisation concept. Whereas parts of your existing authorisation concept can be easily transformed and implemented 1:1 in the SAP S/4 HANA system, other parts need to be changed and adapted to meet the new requirements.

PwC has a proven track record in Switzerland and globally in implementing and transforming SAP authorisation models in the SAP S/4HANA environment. Our GRC Technology Team in Switzerland led and executed the authorisation implementation part of the ninth S4/HANA implementation worldwide from the authorisation concept, to implementation and operation. Our experts have the required skill-set, tools, techniques and experience to discuss your challenges with you, and to actively support you throughout the whole project.

Download the PDF by clicking the image below:

Please contact our team for more details:

Dominik Götz
Senior Manager
+41 58 792 28 93

Erik Trouillet
+41 58 792 23 64

Changes to legislation governing Swiss VAT liability

Swiss VAT law places new obligations on foreign companies

The partial amendment to the Federal Law on Value Added Tax (VAT law) will impact companies not established in Switzerland from 1 January 2018. Businesses which are not based in Switzerland but provide supplies vis-a-vis Switzerland may be liable to pay Swiss VAT. This will apply in instances where a foreign company generates turnover in Switzerland, in other words in cases where Switzerland is the place of supply for the purposes of VAT. The following information outlines the VAT situation in Switzerland today and in the near future.

Download the full report here.

If you have any questions, please get in touch your usual PwC contact person or our expert

Julia Sailer
Leader VAT compliance Switzerland
Tel. +41 58 792 44 57

Additional Languages for this report