Search
Contact
08.05.2019 | KPMG Law Insights

Company pension plan – difference for new pension commitments in the year of publication of new mortality tables

Difference in the case of new pension commitments in the year of publication of new mortality tables (BFH, decision dated February 13, 2019, XI R 34/16)

Christine Hansen and Jean-Baptiste Abel

The plaintiff was a limited liability company (GmbH) that issued a pension commitment to its shareholder managing director in November 2005. The amount reported does not include any additional amount due to the changes in the Heubeck 2005 mortality tables, which were applicable for the first time in 2005, compared with the Heubeck 1998 mortality tables. The tax office assumed that a difference based on the first-time application of the 2005 mortality tables would also have to be spread over three years in the year of the first commitment.
The BFH ruled that no distribution was to be made. The wording of the provision in § 6a para. 4 sentence 2 EStG requires a difference between the partial value of the pension obligation at the end of the fiscal year and at the end of the previous fiscal year. There is no difference when a pension provision is initially recognized. A distribution of the difference is therefore not possible in assessment periods in which a pension commitment is made. The purpose of the provision does not permit any other result either, as it cannot be inferred from the legislative materials that the provision is intended to be applied beyond the wording also to cases of the first-time formation of a pension provision. The BFH thus rejects the opinion of the BMF most recently expressed in the BMF letter of October 19, 2018 (para. 2 therein) that the transfer must take place uniformly for all pension obligations.

Conclusion: Remarkably, the BFH does not base its decision on the fact that the commitment was made after the publication of the new 2015 mortality tables. The decision is thus likely to apply to all new commitments made in the year of the new board’s publication – regardless of whether they were made before or after its publication. The decisive factor should be that a provision was recognized for the first time at the end of the year in question. The decision is particularly topical due to the fact that the 2018 G Heubeck mortality tables were published last year.

Explore #more

20.01.2026 | In the media

Guest article in Personalmagazin – Mobile working: Working without borders?

Mobile working from abroad opens up new opportunities for employees and employers alike. Legally, working models such as “Work from Anywhere” (WFA) or “Workation” must…

12.01.2026 | In the media

Guest article in Economy and Competition: Earnings calls under (AI) control: New starting point for the Commission’s dawn raids

Public statements made by companies in earnings calls harbor antitrust risks: In such presentations of quarterly or annual results and the subsequent discussion with analysts,…

09.01.2026 | KPMG Law Insights

EmpCo comes into force – answers to the most important practical questions

Environmental statements are becoming increasingly risky for companies. Due to the Empowering Consumers Directive (EmpCo), much stricter rules will soon apply to environmental claims and…

05.01.2026 | In the media

KPMG Law expert in the Börsen-Zeitung on the digital euro

The digital euro is set to arrive by 2029. However, the central bank still has a lot of convincing to do. There is a great…

22.12.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

New EU directive tightens environmental criminal law

Environmental crime will be punished more severely in future. Directive (EU) 2024/1203 on the protection of the environment through criminal law is being transposed into…

19.12.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Digital Omnibus: More efficiency instead of deregulation

The EU Commission wants to streamline digital laws. On November 19, 2025, it presented its proposals for the “Digital Omnibus” (including a separate AI Omnibus).…

18.12.2025 | Deal Notifications

KPMG Law and KPMG advise the shareholders of Frerk Aggregatebau on the sale to DEUTZ

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH (KPMG Law) and KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft (KPMG) provided comprehensive advice to the shareholders of Frerk Aggregatebau GmbH (Frerk) on the sale…

17.12.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

AI-supported risk checks of NDAs and CoCs: how legal departments benefit

Artificial intelligence can relieve legal departments of routine tasks such as checking non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) or codes of conduct (CoCs). These documents are part of…

16.12.2025 | In the media

Interview with KPMG Law experts: CSDDD after the omnibus: “Toothless tiger” or pragmatic solution?

The agreement on the Omnibus I package is causing discussion. Among other things, the thresholds for the EU Supply Chain Directive (CSDDD) have been significantly…

15.12.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law guest article in Tagesspiegel Background: What the digital omnibus means for companies today

The debate on the digital omnibus has only just begun. Companies should contribute their expertise to the ongoing process and strengthen their internal foundations –…

Contact

Christine Hansen

Senior Manager
Leiterin Betriebliche Altersversorgung

Heidestraße 58
10557 Berlin

Tel.: +49 30 530199150
christinehansen@kpmg-law.com

© 2026 KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH, associated with KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, a public limited company under German law and a member of the global KPMG organisation of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a Private English Company Limited by Guarantee. All rights reserved. For more details on the structure of KPMG’s global organisation, please visit https://home.kpmg/governance.

KPMG International does not provide services to clients. No member firm is authorised to bind or contract KPMG International or any other member firm to any third party, just as KPMG International is not authorised to bind or contract any other member firm.

Scroll