Book a meeting
Insights

Italian Supreme Court says US pension fund is entitled to same reduced dividend withholding tax rate as Italian pension funds

US pension funds can now enjoy the same reduced dividend withholding tax rates as Italian counterparts, thanks to a landmark ruling by the Italian Supreme Court.

Italian Supreme Court rules that US pension fund is entitled to same lower dividend withholding tax rate as Italian pension funds.

Case facts

In 2008 and 2009, a US pension fund received dividend income from investments in Italian publicly listed companies. An Italian dividend withholding tax was applied and remitted to the Italian tax authorities at a rate of 27% and 15% (reduced rate under the US – Italy tax treaty) respectively.

Under article 27, third paragraph, of the Italian Presidential Decree no. 600/1973, pension funds resident in the EU or EEA are entitled to a reduced rate of dividend withholding tax of 11%.

The US pension fund applied for a refund of Italian withholding tax, equal to the difference between the higher rate of 27% or 15% applied to its income, and the lower rate of 11% applicable to EU and EEA resident pension fund. As a legal basis for this application, the US pension fund argued that being subjected to a higher rate of withholding tax than EU or EEA resident withholding tax is a violation of the free movement of capital, as laid down in article 63 of the EU Treaty. The free movement of capital prohibits not only restrictions on capital movements between EU member states, but also between an EU member state and a non-member state such as, in this case, the US.

Decision from the Italian tax authorities and tax court

After a rejection from the Italian tax authorities and from the Italian appellate tax court, the US pension fund appealed before the Court of Cassation (Corte de Cassazione, the Italian highest court).

Decision form the Italian Court of Cassation

By contrast, the Italian Court of Cassation agreed with the US pension fund, and, with reference to the decision from the European Court of Justice in the case known as the College Pension Plan case, ruled that:

  1. The fact that the claimant is a non-EU resident does not preclude the application of the free movement of capital

  2. The refusal to apply the reduced 11% withholding tax rate to non-EU pension funds may constitute a prohibited restriction of the free movement of capital

  3. The fact that the Italian pension system is based on an exempt-taxed-taxed system (“ETT system” meaning that contributions are deductible, return on investment is taxable and pension benefits - once paid - are taxable) and the US pension system is based on an exempt-exempt-taxed system (“EET system” meaning that contributions are deductible, return on investment is exempt, and pension benefits – once paid – are taxable) does not mean that US pension funds are not objectively comparable to Italian pension funds, and therefore cannot justify the restriction. According to the court, this is illustrated by the fact that most EU member states have an EET system, and that the co-existence of the two systems makes it clear it does not justify a different tax treatment.

The original decision of the Italian Court of Cassation can be found via this link: https://www.osservatorio-wealth.it/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/CASS.-CIV-ORD-N.-25963_22.pdf

Jeroen van der Wal

Founder and CEO

Topics

Unlock your 

withholding tax recovery potential

Get in touch and see for yourself how you can take control and optimize your withholding tax returns

Insights you might also like

SEPTEMBER 17, 2026 • 16 minute read

iShares Europe ETF (C-139/25): the CJEU draws the line between real and theoretical tax neutralization

The Court of Justice of the European Union has delivered its judgment in iShares Europe ETF (C-139/25), concerning the Spanish taxation of dividends received by a US investment fund. The case adds a new question to the CJEU's extensive case law on discriminatory withholding taxation of non-resident investment funds: can a restriction on the free movement of capital be neutralized on the ground that a foreign fund could have chosen a tax treatment in its state of residence under which it would have been able to credit the source-state tax, even though it did not make that choice?

Tax news

AUGUST 18, 2026 • 10 minute read

What MiKaDiv Means for Non-Resident Investors

Discover how MiKaDiv changes German withholding tax reclaims, and what impact it has for non-resident investors.

Tax news

JUNE 12, 2026 • 6 minute read

What Delegated Regulation (EU) 2026/110 Actually Says About FASTER's Reach

Delegated Regulation (EU) 2026/110 has resolved the critical open question in the FASTER Directive: which EU member states must operate under the new fast-track withholding tax framework, and which can stay outside it. The answer will define the operational landscape for institutional investors and custodians from 1 January 2030 onwards.

Tax news