Facts
The appellants, A. and [B.X.] , filed an appeal against the judgment of the Cantonal Tax Court of Solothurn of 14 December 2009. The dispute concerned the taxation of a lump-sum payment from an occupational pension scheme in 2003. [A.X.] had left his position with [B.] on 30 November 2003 to become self-employed and had founded the limited partnership [Y.] on 5 September 2003 and the corporation [Z. AG] on 22 December 2003. The pension institution of [B.] paid [A.X.] his vested benefits in cash on 30 November 2003, on the grounds that he was taking up self-employment.
The tax authority of Solothurn initially taxed the lump-sum payment as a capital benefit from a pension scheme with a special tax at a privileged tax rate. However, it later transpired that [A.X.] had not taken up self-employment, but was still gainfully employed. The tax authority then corrected the tax assessment and taxed the lump-sum payment together with the remaining income at the full tax rate.
The appellants filed a complaint and an appeal with the Tax Court of the Canton of Solothurn, which dismissed the appeals. The appellants then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court, requesting that the judgment of the Tax Court and the corrected tax assessment be set aside and that the tax assessment be carried out in accordance with the original tax assessment.
Considerations
1. Admissibility of the appeal
The appeal in public law matters against the decision of the Tax Court of the Canton of Solothurn regarding direct federal tax and cantonal tax is admissible. The appellants are entitled to appeal.
2. Establishment of the facts
The lower court did not obviously incorrectly or incompletely establish the relevant facts when it denied that the appellant was self-employed. There were no indications that the appellant was self-employed during the period in question, and no income from the limited partnership or from consulting activities was declared.
3. Correction of the tax assessment
The tax authority was entitled to correct the tax…