Facts
On January 20, 1986, G., domiciled in Zurich, passed away. In his will, he had appointed his wife F. as the primary heir and his nieces E. and V. as the subsequent heirs. F. inherited an estate of 3.27 million Swiss francs and died on January 26, 1989, with her last domicile in Ascona. The subsequent inheritance of E. and V. amounted to 1.271 million Swiss francs each. The Canton of Ticino imposed inheritance taxes of 279,620 Swiss francs each on the two subsequent heirs.
The Cantonal Tax Office of Zurich asserted to the Ticino assessment authority that the tax sovereignty for the subsequent inheritance belonged to the Canton of Zurich as the deceased G.'s last domicile. The Canton of Ticino held the view that the primary heir F. had not been obliged to secure the subsequent inheritance and therefore the Canton of Ticino had been entitled to tax the inheritance. Furthermore, the tax claim of the Canton of Zurich had lapsed.
By order of March 27, 1995, the Finance Directorate of the Canton of Zurich obliged E. and V. to pay inheritance taxes totaling 774,410 Swiss francs. Thereupon, E. and V. filed a constitutional complaint due to a violation of the prohibition of double taxation.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court states that there is a current case of double taxation, as the complainants are burdened for the estate of G. both in the Canton of Zurich and in the Canton of Ticino. According to established practice, accessions of movable property from inheritance are subject to inheritance tax in the canton of the deceased's last domicile.
Since G. had his last domicile in Zurich, the tax sovereignty for the subsequent inheritance belongs to the Canton of Zurich. The subsequent heir acquires the inheritance directly from the deceased, which is why the taxation is based on the deceased's last domicile, not the last domicile of the primary heir.
The objection of the Canton of Ticino that the Canton of Zurich had forfeited its tax claim because…