12.12.2024, 12:3312.12.2024, 13:55
The abolition of the imputed rental value is in danger of failing again. A majority of both councils are bothered by the tax. However, how the system change should be implemented is controversial. The National Council and the Council of States do not agree on key points.
At the third and final discussion of the business on Thursday, the small chamber stuck to its previous decisions. She wants to abolish the imputed rental value only for first homes. The Council of States also insisted on its solution to the question of deducting interest on debts. Accordingly, deductions of up to seventy percent of taxable investment income should be permitted in the future.
The large chamber is now insisting on a complete system change. Accordingly, the imputed rental value should also be abolished for second homes. At the same time, she wants to ensure that cantons have the opportunity to levy a property tax on second homes. Finally, the National Council proposes a different method than the Council of States when it comes to deducting interest on debts.
Clear no to the compromise proposal
The responsible Council of States Commission had asked its council to follow the National Council on all points of contention – with the condition that the abolition of the imputed rental value comes into force at the same time as the new constitutional provision on the levying of a property tax. A solution to the long-standing dispute over the abolition of imputed rental value was within sight.
However, the government conference of the mountain cantons rejected the proposal in the run-up to the winter session. Commission spokesman Pirmin Bischof (centre/SO) made it clear at the beginning of his vote on Thursday that the collapse of the proposal was therefore still a realistic scenario.
After an animated and controversial debate, the Council of States ultimately did not even consider the proposal to introduce a property tax. He made this decision with 26 votes to 15 and one abstention. He said an even clearer no – with 29 votes to 12 – to the abolition of the imputed rental value for second properties. With 26 votes to 13 and one abstention, he ultimately rejected the National Council’s compromise proposal for the deduction of interest on debts.
“Extremely high hurdles”
The store’s more than seven-year history speaks for itself, said Bischof. “It’s not an easy template.” The vast majority in both councils agree that the “unique in Europe” imputed rental value should be abolished and the “strange tax law” debt interest deduction should be adjusted. But the devil lies in the details.
The majority in the Council of States does not want a complete system change because this would mean that tourism cantons with a high proportion of second homes in particular would experience significant losses of income. According to the tenor, the compensation solution with a property tax for affected cantons would open up additional fronts. It is therefore important to concentrate on abolishing the imputed rental value on first homes.
Martin Schmid (FDP/GR) recalled that this was a cross-party consensus when discussions began eight years ago. In contrast, the introduction of a property tax for second properties has “extremely high hurdles”. The corresponding constitutional change requires a double majority from the people and classes.
Crash of the template realistic
Even the abolition of the imputed rental value for primary residence will have a difficult time in a referendum, as several speakers emphasized. The tenants’ association has announced that it will hold a referendum against it.
Its president, Councilor of States Carlo Sommaruga (SP/GE), pointed out that the proposal does not solve the imbalance between homeowners and renters. The abolition of the imputed rental value is an old demand of the homeowners’ association that has repeatedly failed before the people. “Tax gifts for rich homeowners” are planned.
Like Sommaruga, Pascal Broulis (FDP/VD) also indicated that he would reject the proposal in the final vote because it would only complicate the system. First it is the National Council’s turn again, after which the unification conference will probably deal with the proposal. As of today, a solution that can attract a majority is not foreseeable. (dab/sda)
This might also interest you:
