No arbitrary allocation of training costs across consecutive employment periods

Taxpayers can claim the Costs for training and further education Basically as Business expense (in the case of self-employment) or as Advertising expenses (in an employment relationship) claim. The BFG had recently (GZ RV/1100403/2012 of 7 January 2015) had to deal with a case in which a taxpayer two consecutive employment relationships had, one of which in Austria and the other abroad It was. The Assignment the cost of continuing education exclusively for domestic employment – possibly due to the fact that there is a lower tax burden abroad than in Austria – was reported by Tax office Not acknowledged.

In its decision-making, the BFG assumed that for the Allocation of advertising costs For example, training and further education measures related to the professional activities exercised are generally covered by the Drainage principle is valid. The taxpayer was Psychologist working in Austria from 1.1. to 31.8. and abroad from 1.10. to 31.12. BFG denied both the psychologist's approach, all costs for training and further education measures of his activities in To be attributed to Austria as well as the view of the Finance Department, the the vast majority the cost of foreign Activity It is to be attributed. Since it was possible to allocate the costs of the two employment relationships economically, the BFG recognized the Date of the training event or the payment due date as decisive criterion. Because of the longer periods of professional activity in Austria Therefore, abroad, the Most of it the costs for training and further education taxable in Austria to be done. From a arbitrary and especially those motivated by tax incentives Attribution, If there is income from abroad and from Germany, it is certainly to be expected.

Image: © estima - Fotolia