Facts
The appellant, the cantonal tax office of St. Gallen, requests the reversal of the judgment of the Administrative Court of the Canton of St. Gallen of December 6, 2017, and the confirmation of the decision on the objection of March 9, 2016. The respondent, [A.] , had a tax domicile in [U.] (Canton of St. Gallen) with her life partner [B.] since 2008 and rented a 2.5-room apartment in [V.] (Canton of Schwyz) as of August 1, 2010. She deregistered in [U.] on November 30, 2010, and registered in [V.] on December 1, 2010. The lower court had established that the taxpayer had her tax domicile in [V.] during the tax period 2013.
The appellant argues that the taxpayer had her tax domicile in [U.] from 1998 to 2012 and that the natural presumption applies that this was also the case during the tax period 2013. The taxpayer failed to rebut this presumption, so it must be assumed that the tax domicile is still in [U.] .
Considerations
The Federal Court examines the legality of the decision of the lower court and bases its judgment on the facts established by the lower court. The lower court established that the taxpayer lived with her life partner in his farmhouse in [U.] since September 15, 1998, and that she rented a 2.5-room apartment in [V.] as of August 1, 2010.
The Federal Court addresses the question of whether the taxpayer had her tax domicile in [U.] or in [V.] during the tax period 2013. It examines whether the taxpayer, as a Training Manager, held a management position and whether this would establish a tax domicile in [V.] . The Federal Court concludes that the taxpayer also had her tax domicile in…