Relief for companies – Council of States wants to review new regulations – News

A step against the excessive bureaucracy: the small chamber agrees to a relief law.

In an international comparison, Switzerland does not fare too well when it comes to how complex government regulations are for companies. With a view to comparative studies by the World Bank, Samuel Rutz from the liberal think tank Avenir Suisse says: “You can see that Switzerland has never been in the top ranks and has fallen further and further behind. Not that Switzerland has re-regulated much, but the others have deregulated and overtaken Switzerland.”

It’s going to be difficult for small businesses

Because hardly anyone has an interest in abolishing existing regulations: “You can hardly get any merits in politics by abolishing a regulation. They would rather create new regulations.”

A regulation can also isolate, that’s the way it is.

And a number of companies even benefit from regulations, says the competition expert from Avenir Suisse, because: “If you set up complicated regulations, then it’s the case that large companies that have a compliance department with twenty or thirty people can deal with it. On the other hand, for a small company that may not have hired a lawyer at all, these are huge barriers to entry into the markets. From there, regulation can also isolate, that’s the way it is.”

Now a new law is intended to relieve companies of at least a little bit of bureaucratic hurdles and regulatory costs.

Relief potential is being examined

In the future, the federal government must examine where there is potential for relief. And he has to show how expensive new regulation would be for companies. Parliament could thus weigh up the costs and benefits and decide, as Stefan Engler, member of the Central Council of States, explains: “The new legal anchoring of principles and auditing obligations should help ensure that new regulations are designed efficiently and, especially for small and medium-sized companies, are lean.”

With more regulation to less regulation: That is a paradoxical project.

The hope for an effective relief was not fulfilled when he read the law, says small business owner Thomas Minder from the SVP parliamentary group: “There is no talk of relieving the regulatory costs in companies. I can’t find a single franc in cost savings and not a single form less that would reduce the costs in our company.» There will be even more effort in which the authorities will have to assess and monitor the consequences of new regulations in the future: “With more regulation, less regulation. It’s a paradoxical project.”

Federal Councilor Guy Parmelin counters Minder’s criticism with the remark that politics is the art of the possible. In the future, the federal government will have a single, digital point of contact for the needs of companies. The Council of States has clearly accepted the law, it is now going to the National Council.

The Council of States, on the other hand, wanted nothing to do with a regulation brake, analogous to the debt brake. This would have required a qualified majority of votes if new regulations were introduced. The majority felt that this would limit Parliament’s freedom of action too much.