On November 19, 2023, the Federal Fiscal Court (BFH) addressed with its ruling (Case No.: VIII R 32/20) the question of to what extent a reduction of the monetary benefit is permissible in the context of the so-called 1% rule for the taxation of private use of company vehicles in certain situations. The decision concerned the consideration of restrictions on the actual availability of the vehicle.
Subject of Taxation in Company Car Provision
Systematics of the 1% Rule
If an employee is provided with a company vehicle for private use as well, § 8 para. 2 sentence 2 ff. of the Income Tax Act (EStG) regularly stipulates a flat-rate taxation of a monetary benefit. The calculation is based on 1% of the domestic list price at the time of initial registration per month, plus certain equipment. This is due to the simplification compared to a complex individual valuation, which would otherwise have to be performed through a properly maintained logbook.
Reduction of the Taxable Benefit
The tax regulation does not distinguish based on the actual extent of private use or specific usage restrictions – as long as the vehicle is fully available. To assert a reduction of the flat-rate determined benefit through special agreements or usage restrictions, a clear proof of legal prerequisites, such as contractual arrangements or objectively ascertainable usage restrictions, is required according to established case law.
Core Statements of the BFH Judgment
Distinction Between Available and Actual Use
In the case under negotiation, a taxpayer sought consideration for a reduction of the benefit when applying the 1% rule, arguing that the vehicle was not available for private use on all days of the year. The BFH clarified that for the application of the 1% rule, only the general provision for private use is relevant; actual usage days are irrelevant for flat-rate taxation, as long as continuous availability is provided.
No Reduction for Temporary Usage Restrictions Without Logbook
The judges stated that a reduction of the monetary benefit determined by the 1% rule can only be considered if it is demonstrably and legally binding that the vehicle was not allowed to be used privately during the respective period, and this prohibition was actually enforced. In the absence of corresponding proof – such as a logbook or binding regulations – the monthly flat rate remains.
Relevance for Employees and Investors
The judgment emphasizes that individuals provided with a company vehicle for private use have very limited opportunities for benefit reduction. This directly impacts the design of employment or provision contracts and tax planning, especially concerning large fleets, company vehicles, or investor involvement.
Impacts and Pending Further Proceedings
The BFH decision provides legal clarity regarding the requirements for reducing the flat-rate benefit in private vehicle use. The previously existing uncertainty about the consideration of temporary usage restrictions within the 1% rule is largely resolved. Whether and to what extent future proceedings will reach different assessments remains open for now; the presumption of innocence and the possibility of other judicial decisions in still pending cases should be noted. The judgment is fully accessible at https://urteile.news/BFH_VIII-R-3220_BFH-zur-Vorteilsminderung-bei-der-1-Prozent-Regelung~N34556 (Source).
Legal Considerations and Advisory Needs
For companies and wealthy private individuals, the BFH decision raises relevant issues regarding the tax treatment of company cars, especially in more complex usage scenarios or special contract designs. In case of uncertainties or further clarification needs, further legal support is recommended to avoid compliance risks or tax disadvantages. Information on individual questions and the service offerings of MTR Legal in this context can be found under Legal Advice in Tax Law.
