TF, 05.26.2026, 9C_325/2026
Facts
In a decision dated April 16, 2026, the Federal Administrative Court dismissed an appeal by A.________ regarding a value-added tax (VAT) dispute for the period from April 1 to September 30, 2009. The decision to dismiss was based on the appellant's failure to pay the required advance on costs. (Consid. 1.1)
A.________ filed an appeal in public law matters with the Federal Supreme Court on May 18, 2026. He requested that the lower court's judgment be set aside and submitted claims regarding debt enforcement proceedings initiated against him, specifically requesting that his objection be upheld, the debt enforcement be struck from the record, and the certificate of shortfall be annulled. (Consid. 1.2)
Law
The Federal Supreme Court reiterates the requirements for the substantiation of an appeal, as defined inArt. 42 para. 1 and 2 of the Federal Supreme Court Act (FSCA). The appeal brief must concisely explain how the contested act violates the law. The appellant must address the specific and decisive reasoning of the lower court's decision and demonstrate precisely how it violated federal law. (Consid. 2.1)
When the lower court has issued a decision of non-admissibility, the appeal to the Federal Supreme Court must specifically demonstrate how the decision not to examine the merits of the case is contrary to federal law or constitutionally untenable. Arguments that merely address the substantive aspects of the dispute without challenging the procedural grounds for the dismissal do not meet legal requirements. Such an appeal is not considered relevant and is therefore inadmissible. (Consid. 2.2)
Application to the case
In his appeal to the Federal Supreme Court, the appellant argues that he was not subject to VAT in 2009 because he did not engage in ancillary activities and his income was below the CHF 100,000 threshold. He describes the judgment of April 16, 2026, as "null and void" and requests the annulment of the debt enforcement and the certificate of shortfall. (Consid. 2.3)
The Federal Supreme Court notes that the appellant does not in any way challenge the grounds that led the lower court to dismiss the case, namely the failure to pay the advance on costs. His arguments are limited exclusively to substantive issues (his VAT liability). By failing to demonstrate how the dismissal decision violates the law, the appeal clearly fails to meet the substantiation requirements of Art. 42 FSCA. (Consid. 2.3)
Outcome
The Federal Supreme Court declares the appeal manifestly inadmissible and decides not to proceed with the case, in accordance with the simplified procedure provided for inArt. 108 para. 1 let. b FSCA. (Consid. 2.3 and 1 of the operative part)
The court costs, set at CHF 500, are charged to the appellant, who has been unsuccessful. No party compensation is awarded. (Consid. 3 and 2 of the operative part)
Silex tax newsletter published in collaboration with Anna Vladau, Attorney at Law
