Federal Supreme Court, 24.10.2025, 9C_585/2025
Facts
A dog owner residing in the municipality of U.________ (VS) was charged a dog tax of 150 CHF per animal for the year 2025, totaling 300 CHF. Her objection to the municipal council was rejected. She subsequently appealed to the Cantonal Court of Valais, which also dismissed her appeal and her request for free legal aid due to the lack of merit in her claims. The owner then appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Legal Analysis
The dog tax in the canton of Valais is a cantonal tax that is not harmonized at the federal level. It is a cost-recovery tax, the amount of which is set by the municipalities within a legal range (Art. 182 para. 1 of the Valais Tax Act).
The Federal Supreme Court reviews the application of cantonal law only in terms of a potential violation of federal law, particularly constitutional rights such as the prohibition of arbitrariness (Art. 9 Cst.) or the principle of equal treatment (Art. 8 Cst.).
For an appeal to be examined on this point, the appellant must satisfy a qualified duty to provide grounds (Art. 106 para. 2 LTF). They must explain clearly and in detail how the contested decision violates their constitutional rights. Simple appellate criticism or the expression of disagreement with the decision is insufficient. If this requirement is not met, the appeal is declared inadmissible.
Application to the specific case
The Federal Supreme Court notes that the appellant merely expresses her dissatisfaction. She criticizes the increase in the tax amount, argues that the legal range should apply per household rather than per animal, and asserts that her dogs do not soil public property.
The Federal Supreme Court finds these arguments to be purely appellate in nature. The appellant does not explain how the Cantonal Court's decision would be arbitrary or violate the principle of equality. She presents no grievances based on constitutional law. Consequently, she clearly fails to meet the qualified motivation requirements of Art. 106 para. 2 LTF, even taking into account that the appeal was filed by a non-lawyer.
Outcome
The Federal Supreme Court does not consider the appeal. The court costs, reduced to 500 CHF, are charged to the appellant. Her implicit request for free legal aid is also rejected due to the total lack of merit in the appeal.
Silex tax newsletter published in collaboration with Anna Vladau, Attorney at Law
