Facts
The appellant, [A.] , is an osteopath and holds the intercantonal diploma as an osteopath, issued by the Swiss Conference of Cantonal Health Directors (GDK) on 30 June 2012. On 30 January 2013, the Health Directorate of the Canton of Zurich granted [A.] permission to use the title of complementary medicine for the first time when practicing as a self-employed person.
The Federal Tax Administration (FTA) registered [A.] in the register of VAT-liable persons with effect from 1 January 2014. After an exchange of letters, the FTA issued a ruling on 18 September 2015, which made [A.] compulsorily VAT-liable as of 1 January 2014 and determined the tax debt for 2014 on the basis of self-assessment.
The appellant lodged a complaint with the Federal Administrative Court, which dismissed the complaint by judgment of 5 April 2017. The appellant then lodged a complaint in public law matters with the Federal Supreme Court.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court examined whether the services provided by the appellant as an osteopath are exempt from tax. The lower court had correctly set out the requirements for subjective tax liability and the principles regarding taxable services.
The appellant argued that the services she provided constituted medical treatments in the field of human medicine within the meaning of Art. 21 para. 2 no. 3 VATA in conjunction with Art. 34 para. 1 VATO and that she held a permit to practice her profession.
The Federal Supreme Court came to the conclusion that the requirement of Art. 35 para. 1 lit. b VATO, according to…