(2021) Maintenance payments to relatives abroad: Stricter proof required for cash payments

Many foreign citizens living and working in Germany support relatives abroad. People with a foreign spouse may also provide maintenance to their spouse's relatives. Since 2007, the tax office has imposed stricter requirements on the recipient's neediness and proof of maintenance payments for maintenance to relatives abroad. Particularly stringent proof requirements apply to cash payments.

The Federal Fiscal Court rejected maintenance payments to the mother living in Hungary because the cash payments were not sufficiently proven. In the case of maintenance payments to recipients living abroad, the parties involved are particularly obliged to cooperate in clarifying the matter and to obtain evidence. The evidence required to prove a fact depends on the circumstances of the individual case (BFH ruling of 09.03.2017, VI R 33/16).

• Proof of a cash payment requires a reliable recipient confirmation and a timely, complete proof of the "payment chain", i.e. evidence of withdrawals or the specific availability of these amounts at the time of payment by the maintenance payer. The mere existence of corresponding income and asset conditions is not sufficient.
• In addition, the maintenance payer must provide detailed and reliable evidence of the "how and when" of the cash payment. Therefore, convincing evidence is hindered if the payer cannot prove that they were at the payment location for the claimed cash payment. Although the maintenance payer does not have to personally hand over the cash, they must name the "bearer", i.e. the person who delivered the money.
• In the court case, there was no proof that the stated payments were actually made. The submitted receipts were insufficient. They did not indicate whether the recipient received the payments as a lump sum or in instalments. The confirmations stated a total payment of 1,800 Euro. Furthermore, the confirmations did not specify when the payment(s) were made. The documents were dated, but the date only referred to the day of issue, not the time of the cash payment.