2024 - Vote of June 18 - Is there really no alternative to the proposal for the OECD minimum tax?

Contents

Finance Minister Karin-Keller warns: If the proposal is rejected, tax money would flow out of Switzerland. Now there are doubts about the presentation.

Author:
Philip Schrämmli

On June 18, Swiss voters will vote on the introduction of the OECD minimum tax. Specifically, the point is that large companies with annual sales of CHF 750 million should be taxed at least 15 percent in the future. Corporate taxes are now lower in many cantons.

One of the main arguments in favor of this bill, which Federal Councilor Karin Keller-Sutter has repeatedly put forward, is that if this tax is not introduced, other countries will be allowed to levy additional taxes on the companies concerned from 2024. In the event of a no to the submission, tax money would flow out of Switzerland.

It has been clear for months that it would be possible without any problems to bring a new template with retrospective effect.

Doubts are now being raised as to whether this would really be the inevitable consequence of a no to the OECD minimum tax – or whether there would still be time for a second proposal.

The weekly newspaper (WOZ) has doubts about the lack of alternatives to the bill Article scattered, which was published on Thursday. The WOZ published internal e-mails from the finance department, which are intended to prove that Karin Keller-Sutter’s department had thought about how things could continue if the OECD proposal was rejected – and without Switzerland paying tax money loses.

This could be achieved by presenting a new OECD tax proposal to the population in spring 2024, which would then come into force retrospectively, i.e. as of January 1, 2024, according to the deliberations.

The fact that the finance department has not actively communicated the option of a new proposal annoys Cédric Wermuth, co-president of the SP, which is fighting the current proposal. “It has been clear for months that it would be possible without any problems to bring a new template with retrospective effect.”

According to Wermuth, what is new about the WOZ’s research is that the finance department apparently also knows this. “And I don’t think it was telling the full truth, at least.”

Finance department reacts to WOZ article

The Finance Department immediately published a correction to the WOZ article. There the department writes that Keller-Sutter was never asked about the possibility of a retroactive effect.

Such a retroactive effect would “of course always be legally possible”, but this would then be the result of a democratic process that cannot be anticipated.

Wermuth says about these statements by the finance department: “I looked at the voting booklet again. It says literally that if the answer were no, the money would go abroad. Now it’s clear that that’s not true.” And against this background, alternatives to the current template can now be examined again, says Wermuth.

What happens if you say no? Without the proposed constitutional amendment, the Federal Council cannot implement minimum taxation. Then other states could collect the difference between the lower tax burden and the minimum taxation according to the OECD of 15 percent. The affected groups of companies would have to pay the additional taxes abroad.

Source: Federal Council explanations – referendum of 18 June 2023.

The SP is not fundamentally against the introduction of the OECD minimum tax. She is bothered by the implementation – specifically because 75 percent of the additional tax revenue should remain in the cantons and only 25 percent should flow to the federal government.