Executive Summary

The industrial association Swissmem proposes combining the planned value-added tax increases for the army and AHV in a single template. This would prevent the people from voting separately on the two questions. A current legal opinion supports this idea. Both areas are considered important state tasks with urgent financing needs, but encounter broad resistance when increases are proposed separately. The proposal recalls the tax-AHV reform from seven years ago, which was then criticized as a "horse deal."

People

  • Fabian Schäfer (Author, Bern)

Topics

  • Swiss tax policy
  • Old-age insurance (AHV)
  • Military financing
  • Value-added taxes
  • Voting rights

Clarus Lead

The strategy of a "package" proposal could lower political hurdles for both reforms by forcing supporters of one measure to also accept the other. This raises the question of whether federal politics is increasingly dependent on coupling deals to push through difficult reforms. A legal opinion could change the constitutional admissibility of this strategy and thus expand or restrict the scope for future combinations. The coming weeks will show whether this dual strategy will achieve majority support or will encounter fundamental concerns about voting rights.

Detailed Summary

Swissmem argues that the army and AHV, despite different functions, share common features: both are central state tasks with immediately urgent financing needs. The Federal Council plans to increase value-added tax for both to close financing gaps. However, such increases on both issues lead to considerable political resistance – whether from opponents of military spending or from those who want to minimize the burden on pensioners.

The core of the proposal lies in procedural architecture: A combined template would deprive the voting population of the opportunity to decide separately on army and AHV financing. Instead, the entire package would have to be accepted or rejected. This only works if both legislative bodies and the Federal Council cooperate – and if a legal opinion confirms feasibility.

The historical reference to the "horse deal" from seven years ago illustrates the political pattern: back then, tax reform and AHV reform were coupled to overcome resistance. A similar strategy is now being considered for a new combination package, raising the question of whether such couplings have become a systematic feature of modern Swiss reform policy.

Key Points

  • Swissmem proposes combining value-added tax increases for the army and AHV in a single template
  • A legal opinion supports the constitutional feasibility of this combination
  • The people would have no opportunity to vote separately on the two issues
  • Both areas urgently need additional financing but encounter political resistance
  • The proposal follows a proven pattern from the tax-AHV reform seven years ago

Critical Questions

  1. Legal basis: What specific constitutional arguments does the legal opinion support, and under what conditions could it be challenged before the Federal Court?

  2. Effectiveness of coupling: Do surveys show that voters who would reject one of the two measures would concede their position in case of coupling or reinforce their rejection?

  3. Legitimation through separation requirement: Does the coupling violate the democratic principle that voters should be able to assess individual questions independently?

  4. Long-term risks: If the concept proves successful, is there a risk that future reform packages will increasingly be driven forward through unrelated couplings?

  5. Alternatives: Why are the two tax increases being pursued only in a coupled manner rather than sequentially – what scenarios would allow for time intervals?

Source List

Primary source: Fabian Schäfer: "Is another 'horse deal' coming? Swissmem wants to link AHV financing with higher taxes for the army" – Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 15.05.2026 https://www.nzz.ch/schweiz/kommt-nun-der-naechste-kuhhandel-swissmem-will-die-steuern-fuer-ahv-und-armee-mit-einer-einzigen-vorlage-erhoehen-ld.10007188

Verification status: ✓ 15.05.2026

This text was created with the support of an AI model. Editorial responsibility: clarus.news | Fact-checking: 15.05.2026