Facts
The [X. AG] , a company based in [A.] /TransA, was fined for attempted tax evasion in respect of direct federal tax 2006 and cantonal and communal taxes 2006. The tax administration of the canton of Thurgau had found that the [X. AG] had declared a taxable profit of only CHF 28'184.-- in its tax return 2006, although it had actually earned a profit share in the construction consortium "[Y.] " in the amount of CHF 135'301.--. The [X. AG] appealed the fine notices to the Administrative Court of the canton of Thurgau, which dismissed the appeals.
The [X. AG] then filed a complaint with the Federal Court and requested that the judgments of the Administrative Court be set aside and that no fine be imposed. The complaint was directed against the decisions of the Administrative Court of the canton of Thurgau of 16 February 2011.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined the complaint and came to the conclusion that the lower court had rightly affirmed the objective elements of attempted tax evasion. The [X. AG] had declared a taxable profit of only CHF 28'184.-- in its tax return 2006, although it had actually earned a profit share in the construction consortium "[Y.] " in the amount of CHF 135'301.--.
The Federal Court found that the lower court had also rightly affirmed the subjective elements of attempted tax evasion. The sole director of the [X. AG] , [Q.] , had signed the tax return himself and had thus assumed responsibility for the accuracy of the information contained therein. He was aware that the profit share in the construction consortium "[Y.] " had not been declared in the tax return.
The…