SHARE
COPY LINK
For members

ECONOMY

What is Switzerland’s debt brake and how does it affect residents?

As neighbour Germany is grappling with its own debt brake imbroglio, you may be wondering how this system, designed to prevent chronic government deficits, is functioning in Switzerland. And how does it impact residents here?

What is Switzerland’s debt brake and how does it affect residents?
Low government debt enables research to thrive. Image by Michal Jarmoluk from Pixabay

While the issue of national debt is a hot-button topic in Germany at the moment, in Switzerland it is not stirring controversy or any heated debates. 

In fact, the fiscally-responsible Swiss government is averse to debts, so it has kept its finances (that is, spending) on an even keel ever since the principle of debt brake has been introduced in 2003.

What exactly is it?

According to the government, it is a mechanism designed to “prevent chronic deficits and keep federal debt from soaring.”

Just as it is for private spending, the government must be careful not to exceed the set ‘expenditure ceiling.’

As any other piece of legislation that’s in force in Switzerland, this law was also approved by Swiss voters: 85 percent accepted the constitutional provision on the debt brake in 2001.

That law went into effect in 2003, and since then “it has served as an anchor for the federal government’s fiscal policy.”

“With a debt ratio of around 30 percent of gross domestic product, Switzerland remains in excellent shape by international standards,” the government pointed out. “The debt brake has not only significantly helped Switzerland to overcome multiple crises relatively well; it has also allowed for a considerable reduction in federal debt.”

It added that “the debt situation in Switzerland is much better than in other countries.”

Has the ‘debt break’ principle always worked well?

In ‘normal’ times, yes.

However, the Covid pandemic was the biggest challenge to the debt brake so far.

The government made 30 billion francs available within a very short time to cushion the economic impact of the health crisis on the economy — the money which will have to be repaid eventually, since the government doesn’t want to create even more deficit.

While Covid strained federal coffers in an unprecedented manner, this provision is included in the debt brake legislation.

“Additional extraordinary expenditure is possible in exceptional and uncontrollable situations, such as severe recessions and natural disasters,” authorities said.

In such circumstances, “a qualified majority of both chambers of Parliament is required to increase the expenditure ceiling.”

Overall, the debt brake, as well as the careful way the government has managed to keep it in check, “has played a significant role in Switzerland’s financial regulation and contributes significantly to the country’s fiscal discipline,” according to a political, social, and economic think tank,  Avenir Suisse. 

How does this soundly managed debt brake benefit Switzerland’s residents?

First, let’s look why a high debt is bad for the country’s economy and, therefore, for its population as well.

Simply put, a debt (whether private or public) has to be repaid, and the higher the debt and the slower the process of repayment, the higher the interest rates.
 
And high interest costs could curb government spending on a variety of much-needed public programmes and projects and, consequently, stunt economic growth as well.

In most extreme situations, a rising government debt can even trigger a financial crisis.
 
On the other hand, a low national debt, as is the case in Switzerland, has the opposite effect: the government has money to fund the education system, social programmes, research and development, and various infrastructure that benefits everyone in the country.

In other words, it has contributed to Switzerland’s (and its population’s) prosperity.

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.

RENTING

Why there is a push in Switzerland to make buildings higher

Tall residential buildings are not very common in Swiss cities, but efforts to change this are gathering strength.

Why there is a push in Switzerland to make buildings higher

Many of Switzerland’s cities are suffering from a chronic housing shortage, with the demand for accommodation far exceeding the available supply.

Though a number of measures have been proposed — for instance, loosening certain regulations which slow down construction of new buildings, such as noise ordinances — the Swiss Tenants Association has said current plans lack “rapid and effective measures.”

READ ALSO: Why Swiss tenants are unhappy with plan to solve housing shortage

Reaching new heights

Another possible solution currently on the table addresses the scarcity of land for new constructions.

“This is why expansion must absolutely take place at height,” the Liberal-Radical Party (PLR) said in a press release

This means that additional living space should be created on top of current residential buildings.

To that end, “building and zoning regulations in Swiss cities must be adapted so as to systematically integrate the raising of one or two floors into urban plans.” 

“In addition, in all residential areas, the maximum authorised height of existing buildings should be  increased by at least three metres. This should make it possible to add an additional floor or two for housing, where possible,” the party states.

The ‘where possible’ clause would exclude historic buildings that cannot be altered and ones where adding more floors is not feasible for technical reasons.

Building ‘upwards’ not only creates space for more dwellings, but also helps stop urban sprawl and preserves agricultural land, according to  PLR’s MP Simone de Montmollin. 

What might happen next?

The party has started an online petition, which it urges all Swiss citizens who favour this change to sign. 

“Building and zoning standards in Swiss cities must be adapted so that the maximum permitted height for existing buildings in all residential areas is increased by three metres,” its text says. “This should make it possible to add an additional floor for housing, independently of the existing use.”

If and when the petition collects at least 100,000 signatures, the issue would be brought to a ballot box.

No details are available about the number of signatures collected to date.

Historic perspective

While the idea may sound ground-breaking, it is not.

As de Montmollin pointed out, already in the 16th century, houses were raised in Geneva to create accommodation for persecuted Protestants (Huguenots) fleeing France.

Much more recently, such ‘elevations’ have been possible in Geneva thanks to a law passed in 2008.

And in Zurich, the PLR, along with a multi-party coalition, launched a popular initiative for the raising of existing buildings.

SHOW COMMENTS