Skip to content

Applying for a binding assurance after a German tax audit

Following a TAX AUDIT, the tax authority shall on application give the taxpayer a binding assurance as to how a set of facts AUDITED for the past and SET OUT IN THE AUDIT REPORT will be treated for tax purposes in future, where knowing that future treatment matters for the taxpayer's business decisions (§ 204(1) AO). The assurance binds where the facts later carried out COINCIDE with those it was based on (§ 206(1) AO) — and it does NOT bind where it contradicts the law to the applicant's DISADVANTAGE (subsection 2). The binding effect therefore runs one way only.

Up to date for 2026 — verified on September 23, 2026Official procedure, no printed formGuide: about 30 min

Deadlines

Following the tax audit
§ 204(1) AO — the audit report is the basis the assurance may refer to (§ 205(2) no. 1 AO)
Or earlier, after a partial closing notice
§ 204(2) AO together with § 180(1a) AO, and only on a credibly shown particular interest
The assurance lapses OF ITSELF where the legal provisions change
§ 207(1) AO — no act of the authority and no notification is needed

Documents to prepare

  • ELSTER access with a certificate or an ELSTER business account
  • The audit report, with the passage covering the facts at issue
  • Where relevant, the partial closing notice under § 180(1a) AO
  • An account of the facts as they are to recur in future
  • Reasons why this matters for your business decisions
  • For an application before the audit closes: evidence of the particular interest
  • A statement of which taxes and which period the assurance should cover
See the procedure on the official site

No form is attached to this procedure: the link leads to the official page that describes it.

What this page gives you

The guide above and the link to the official site. ActioFin does not produce any document for this page: whatever you fill in or file is done on the official medium.

Who this applies to

  • Any taxpayer who has been through a tax audit and whose audited facts will recur in future (§ 204(1) AO)
  • Anyone able to show that knowing the future tax treatment matters for their BUSINESS DECISIONS — that is an element of the provision, not an accompaniment
  • Anyone unwilling to wait for the audit to end: after a partial closing notice under § 180(1a) AO the assurance may be given earlier, provided there is in addition a particular interest in obtaining it before the audit closes, credibly shown (§ 204(2) AO)
  • NOT available for facts that were never audited: the assurance attaches to the facts set out in the audit report (§ 204(1) AO)
  • NOT available without an audit. Anyone seeking certainty before a planned arrangement takes the binding ruling route under § 89(2) AO
  • Anyone who has obtained the assurance stays bound by the requirement of coincidence: if the facts carried out differ, the binding effect falls away (§ 206(1) AO)

Worked example

An audit of Holzbau Rettig GmbH covering 2022 to 2024 closes in 2026

The auditor examined the treatment of a recurring contractual model and set it out in the audit report. The model continues, and the management wants to know where it stands going forward. That is exactly what § 204(1) AO is for: following a tax audit the authority SHALL, on application, give a binding assurance as to how facts audited for the past and set out in the audit report will be treated in future — provided that knowing this matters for business decisions. The company applies through ELSTER and states that interest expressly. If the assurance is given, it is issued in writing and marked as BINDING (§ 205(1) AO); it must contain the facts it is based on — reference may be made to those set out in the audit report — the decision with its reasons, and a statement of WHICH TAXES AND WHICH PERIOD it covers (§ 205(2) AO). Three limits remain. First, it binds only where the facts later carried out coincide with those it was based on (§ 206(1) AO) — if the company changes the contractual model, the assurance is worthless. Second, it does not bind to the extent it contradicts the law to the applicant's DISADVANTAGE (§ 206(2) AO): an error against the company remains correctable, an error in its favour does not. Third, it lapses where the legal provisions on which the decision rests are amended (§ 207(1) AO) — with nothing to do and no notice given.

How to fill it in, step by step

  1. Wait for the audit to close — or check whether a partial closing notice under § 180(1a) AO has been issued and whether you can credibly show a particular interest in an earlier assurance (§ 204(2) AO).
  2. Identify in the audit report the facts at issue: the assurance attaches to the facts set out THERE (§ 204(1) AO).
  3. Explain why knowing the future tax treatment matters for your business decisions — without that element the application lacks a condition.
  4. Frame the question so that it can be answered for the FUTURE: the assurance says how the facts will be treated going forward, not how the past should have been assessed.
  5. Log in to Mein ELSTER and select the application for a binding assurance.
  6. Check the assurance you receive for its mandatory contents: the facts relied on, the decision with reasons, and the statement of which taxes and which period it covers (§ 205(2) AO).
  7. Check that it is issued in writing and MARKED as binding (§ 205(1) AO) — without that marking it is not an assurance within §§ 204 et seq. AO.
  8. Keep the assured facts unchanged: the binding effect presupposes coincidence (§ 206(1) AO).
  9. Watch for legislative change: the assurance lapses where the provisions it rests on are amended (§ 207(1) AO).

Good to know

  • The binding effect is ASYMMETRIC: § 206(1) AO binds the assessment to the assurance, but subsection 2 excepts the case where the assurance contradicts the law to the applicant's DISADVANTAGE. An unlawful assurance therefore protects so long as it is favourable.
  • §§ 204 to 207 AO name NO fee — unlike § 89(3) to (6) AO for the binding ruling, which expressly provides for one. That observation concerns the statutory text read, not every conceivable ancillary provision.
  • The assurance must state WHICH TAXES AND WHICH PERIOD it covers (§ 205(2) no. 3 AO). Anyone receiving one should read that first — it bounds everything else.
  • For the facts, reference may be made to those set out in the audit report (§ 205(2) no. 1 AO): the report thereby becomes part of the basis.
  • The authority may set aside or amend the assurance with effect for the FUTURE (§ 207(2) AO) — it is not a permanent state.
  • RETROSPECTIVE setting aside or amendment is permissible only where the taxpayer consents or the conditions of § 130(2) nos. 1 or 2 AO are met (§ 207(3) AO).
  • Lapse on a change in the law happens of itself (§ 207(1) AO): there is no notice to wait for.
  • The earlier route through a partial closing notice requires TWO conditions cumulatively: relevance for business decisions AND a particular, credibly shown interest in obtaining the assurance before the audit closes (§ 204(2) AO).

Common mistakes

  • Applying for a binding assurance without a tax audit. § 204(1) AO presupposes one; for planned arrangements without an audit, the binding ruling under § 89(2) AO is the right route.
  • Seeking an assurance on facts not set out in the audit report. The assurance attaches to those set out there (§ 204(1) AO).
  • Treating the assurance as an assessment of the PAST. It assures how the facts will be treated IN FUTURE.
  • Not explaining the business relevance. It appears as a condition in the statutory text.
  • Changing the facts afterwards. The binding effect presupposes that the facts later carried out COINCIDE with those relied on (§ 206(1) AO).
  • Relying on an assurance that contradicts the law to the applicant's disadvantage. In that case the binding effect precisely does not apply (§ 206(2) AO).
  • Continuing to build on the assurance after a change in the law. It then lapses (§ 207(1) AO), with nobody notifying you.
  • Skipping the statement of taxes and period. It is a mandatory content and at the same time the limit of the assurance (§ 205(2) no. 3 AO).

Frequently asked questions

How does the assurance differ from a binding ruling?

In what it attaches to. The binding assurance is given following a tax audit and concerns facts audited for the past and set out in the audit report (§ 204(1) AO). The binding ruling concerns precisely defined arrangements not yet carried out (§ 89(2) sentence 1 AO).

What must the assurance contain?

The facts it is based on, reference being possible to those set out in the audit report, the decision on the application with the governing reasons, and a statement of which taxes and which period it covers (§ 205(2) AO). It is issued in writing and marked as binding (subsection 1).

When does it actually bind?

Where the facts later carried out coincide with those the assurance was based on (§ 206(1) AO). It does not bind to the extent it contradicts the law to the applicant's disadvantage (subsection 2).

Can I get it before the audit ends?

On two conditions. After a partial closing notice under § 180(1a) AO the tax administration may give an assurance on application where knowing the future treatment matters for business decisions AND there is a particular interest in obtaining it before the audit closes, credibly shown (§ 204(2) AO).

What happens if the law changes?

The binding assurance lapses where the legal provisions on which the decision rests are amended (§ 207(1) AO). That happens of itself.

Can the tax office withdraw the assurance?

With effect for the future, yes (§ 207(2) AO). Retrospective setting aside or amendment is permissible only where the taxpayer consents or the conditions of § 130(2) nos. 1 or 2 AO are met (subsection 3).

Go further

Compute the related amounts

Understand this form: the related course

Related forms

Official sources

Read in German

Guide and document provided for information purposes only; they do not constitute personalised legal or tax advice. Check the recipient organisation's requirements and consult a professional if needed.