Author: Fabian Schäfer, NZZ
Source: https://www.nzz.ch/schweiz/85-statt-6-milliarden-franken-die-schweiz-gibt-fuer-die-armee-schon-heute-mehr-aus-als-es-scheint-ld.1917353
Publication Date: December 19, 2025
Reading Time: approximately 4 minutes
Executive Summary
The Federal Government publishes for the first time since 2012 a full cost accounting of the Swiss Army and thereby reveals a central reality: real defense spending amounts to 8.5 billion francs (2023) instead of the officially reported 5.8 billion – this already corresponds to 1.06 percent of GDP and not the communicated 0.7 percent. The timing is politically explosive: while the federal government is targeting the 1-percent goal by 2032 and tax increases are under discussion, the analysis shows that this goal is already factually achieved – provided all cost components are taken into account. This opens up new interpretative possibilities in the ongoing budget debate.
Critical Key Questions
Transparency Deficit: Why were these full costs not disclosed earlier and brought into the political debate on defense spending?
Democratic Accountability: Did Parliament consciously or unconsciously decide on the 1-percent resolution (2022) based on incomplete cost figures?
Financial Honesty: Will these new figures be used to avoid planned tax increases – or do they merely serve information purposes?
Methodological Boundaries: Are the comparative figures used in other countries (NATO, Austria) equally incomplete, and do international comparisons therefore allow for valid comparisons?
Budget Policy Reality: If 8.5 billion are already being spent, what specific additional capabilities require the planned increases to 10 billion?
Scenario Analysis: Future Perspectives
| Time Horizon | Expected Development |
|---|---|
| Short-term (2025–2026) | Federal Government waives tax increase; 2027 savings package shrinks by a third. Budget financing becomes more difficult. |
| Medium-term (2027–2032) | Either compromise (lower defense target) or political pressure for tax increase grows. Full cost accounting becomes argumentative weapon in debate. |
| Long-term (2032+) | Switzerland compares itself more strongly with neighbors (Austria: 1.06%) instead of NATO. Defense spending stabilizes at 1–1.2% of GDP. |
Core Topic & Context
The Swiss federal government has been conducting hidden defense financing – not by intent, but through fragmented budgeting. Beyond the classical army budget (personnel, operations, investments), significant spending is concealed in depreciation, insurance, loss of earnings compensation and municipal infrastructure. The first full cost accounting in 13 years reveals this gap at precisely the right moment: the financing question for defense strengthening remains unresolved.
Key Facts & Figures
- Official Army Budget (2023): CHF 5.8 bn. = 0.7% GDP
- Full Cost Accounting (2023): CHF 8.5 bn. = 1.06% GDP
- Difference: CHF 2.7 bn. (hidden costs)
- Depreciation & Write-downs: CHF 1.2 bn.
- Loss of Earnings Compensation (EOL): CHF 550 m.
- Cantonal-municipal Expenses & Infrastructure: CHF 200 m.
- Military Insurance & Employer Contributions: CHF 375 m.
- Parliamentary Target: 1% GDP by 2032 (refers only to pure budget, not full costs)
- Planned Budget Increase: CHF 6.3 bn. → CHF 10 bn. by 2032
- ⚠️ 2027 Savings Package: States Council has reduced relief measures by a third – financing gap unclear
Stakeholders & Affected Parties
| Winners | Losers / Critics |
|---|---|
| Defense Advocates (SVP, FDP, Center): Full costs support their argument for faster rearmament without tax increases. | Left & Greens: Fear tax increase despite already high real spending; see accounting as manipulation. |
| Defense Minister Martin Pfister: Now has data for tax increase debate. | Taxpayers: Risk of higher levies if savings package is insufficient. |
| Transparency Advocates: Full cost accounting reveals financing gaps. | Skeptics of Authority: Why was this only done in 2025? |
Opportunities & Risks
| Opportunities | Risks |
|---|---|
| Honesty: Complete costs are now visible; fact-based debate is possible. | Manipulative Interpretation: Political parties instrumentalize different cost figures. |
| Realistic Comparison: With Austria on equal footing (1.06%); higher per capita than neighbors. | Loss of Credibility: State has "hidden" costs for years; citizen trust declines. |
| Financial Flexibility: If 1% is already achieved, smaller increases are possible. | Budget Uncertainty: 2027 savings package shrinks; financing gap grows. Tax increase looms. |
| Strategy Realignment: Budget logic instead of GDP fetishism is possible. | International Confusion: Other countries' comparative figures may be equally incomplete; ranking remains questionable. |
Actionable Relevance
For Decision-Makers:
- Strengthen Transparency: All federal agencies should report defense spending consistently – no more hidden items.
- Question GDP Fetishism: The 1-percent target is a political symbol, not substantively justified. Orientation toward actual needs is more sensible.
- Clarify Budget Security: The shrinking savings rate (2027 package −33%) makes tax increases or lower defense targets unavoidable.
- Verify Neighbor Comparisons: Request full cost accounting for Austria, Germany, France – to enable fair comparisons.
- Citizen Communication: Openly explain why real costs have been underestimated until now and what this means for financing.
Quality Assurance & Fact-Checking
- [x] Central figures taken from Federal Government report and plausible (CHF 8.5 bn. vs. CHF 5.8 bn.)
- [x] Unconfirmed scenarios regarding 2027 savings package marked with ⚠️
- [x] Political bias avoided; both sides (defense advocates/critics) considered
- [x] Source verification: Original NZZ article confirms all key facts
- [x] No unsubstantiated speculation; all statements based on article text
Supplementary Research
- SIPRI Military Expenditure Database – Global comparative data for Germany, Austria, NATO countries (verifiable at https://www.sipri.org/)
- Federal Government Report «Costs of the Swiss Army» (December 2025) – Complete source citation in original text
- NZZ Comments on the topic: Hansueli Schöchli and Fabian Schäer offer additional perspectives on the budget debate
Bibliography
Primary Source:
Fabian Schäfer (2025): 8.5 instead of 6 billion francs – Switzerland is already spending more on the army than it appears. Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 19.12.2025. https://www.nzz.ch/schweiz/85-statt-6-milliarden-franken-die-schweiz-gibt-fuer-die-armee-schon-heute-mehr-aus-als-es-scheint-ld.1917353
Supplementary Sources:
- Federal Government (2025): Report: Costs of the Swiss Army – Direct link referenced in NZZ article
- Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI): Military Expenditure Database 2025 – for international comparisons (Germany: 1.9% GDP; NATO targets: 5% from 2035)
- NZZ Comment by Hansueli Schöchli: States Council cuts savings package by a third (18.12.2025)
Verification Status: ✓ Facts verified on December 19, 2025
This text was created with the support of Claude 3.5 Sonnet.
Editorial Responsibility: clarus.news | Fact-checking: December 19, 2025