Buchveröffentlichungen

Tax expenditures country report: Switzerland

Hongler, Peter / Agustin Redonda
Buchveröffentlichungen (2026)

Bonn/Zurich: German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS) and Council on Economic Policies (CEP)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.23661/cr2.2026

Dt. Ausg. u.d.T.:
Länderbericht zu Steuervergünstigungen: Schweiz
 

Tax expenditures (TEs) constitute a key instrument in Swiss fiscal policy. Although they are widely used at both the federal and cantonal levels to pursue economic, social, and environmental objectives, their fiscal cost, effectiveness, and distributional consequences remain only partially documented. This report reviews the current state of TE reporting, estimation, evaluation, and reform in Switzerland.
The available evidence suggests that annual revenue forgone from federal TEs amounts to more than CHF 24 billion. However, this figure should be interpreted with great caution. It is based on outdated and incomplete information and likely represents a lower-bound estimate of the true fiscal cost of federal TEs. The latest comprehensive federal TE report was published by the Federal Tax Administration (FTA) in 2011, while many of the underlying revenue forgone estimates were themselves derived from an even older study conducted by the FTA in 2009 using tax return data from the canton of Bern and extrapolated to the rest of the country. More recently, the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) published a combination of aggregate and provision-level estimates for 2019 in its 2021 report on the “State Footprint”. The figures included new estimates for some TE provisions, namely for TE granted through the mineral oil tax and further excise taxes as well as the vehicle tax and the national road tax. Yet, most of the data was based on the estimates published in 2011. The report estimated the overall yearly revenue forgone stemming from the use of TEs at more than CHF 24 billion.
The 2011 report provides a detailed discussion of the benchmark classification of TE provisions used in Switzerland. The definition of the benchmark tax system is key for TE policy-making as TEs are defined as deviations from the reference or benchmark tax system. Interestingly, and unlike most of the countries worldwide that rely primarily on existing legislation, the benchmark tax system (BTS) for direct taxes in Switzerland is defined based on two theoretically grounded benchmarks: one based on income and an alternative one based consumption.
The lack of reliable and up-to-date information is particularly concerning given the legal framework governing subsidies and TEs. Article 7(g) of the Federal Act on Financial Aids and Compensation Payments (Subsidies Act, SubA) establishes that, in principle, the use of TEs should be avoided. In its 1986 dispatch, the Federal Council explicitly warned that TEs can undermine tax equity, reduce democratic oversight, and escape systematic scrutiny because their fiscal implications are often difficult to quantify. On this note, Article 5 of the SubA requires the federal government to report on TEs every six years as part of its broader subsidy reporting obligations. This requirement has not been fulfilled. The issue has been repeatedly noted by the Federal Council, Parliament, and the Swiss Federal Audit Office (SFAO) and yet, a regular and institutionalized reporting framework has still not been established.
The current estimate of more than CHF 24 billion in TEs on the federal level does not account for the fiscal cost of cantonal TEs. Indeed, at the subnational level, reporting is even more limited with only two significant estimation exercises: a 2011 study conducted by the FTA on personal income-related TEs in the canton of Zug, and a 2025 review of personal income tax (PIT) related TEs published by the canton of Zürich. No canton has established a recurring TE reporting framework. Furthermore, no federal or cantonal estimation exercise currently provides estimates of TEs granted through corporate income tax (CIT), despite the growing importance of tax incentives in the CIT system.
Based on the limited available data from 2011, one can observe that the composition of Swiss TEs is highly concentrated. The ten largest federal provisions account for approximately CHF 16.1 billion, or roughly 63 percent of total reported federal revenue forgone. The largest single provision is the deduction for mandatory second-pillar pension contributions under PIT, estimated at CHF 3.5 billion annually. Other major provisions include the reduced VAT rate on food, plants, and printed products (CHF 2.2 billion), VAT exemptions for real estate transactions and rentals (CHF 2.0 billion), and VAT exemptions for social and health services (CHF 1.9 billion). 
Beyond transparency concerns, the absence of robust information undermines the evaluation of TE effectiveness. Switzerland lags significantly behind international standards in this area. There is currently no formal TE evaluation framework providing guidance on ex-ante assessments, ex post evaluations, governance arrangements, or data-sharing procedures. As a result, policymakers often lack the evidence necessary to determine whether TEs represent value for money and achieve their intended objectives; or are ineffective, too costly or generate unintended distributional and economic effects. The combination of weak reporting practices and limited access to administrative tax data has contributed to a striking lack of official ex-post evaluations.
The situation is somewhat more encouraging regarding ex ante assessments. Federal institutions regularly prepare ad hoc analyses in response to parliamentary requests and legislative initiatives. These assessments frequently provide valuable information on the expected fiscal and economic effects of proposed TE reforms and play an important role in informing political debate. 
TEs remain high-up in the political debate and reform agendas. Recent years have seen numerous legislative initiatives involving reduced VAT rates, PIT deductions, inheritance and gift tax exemptions, and CIT incentives. Examples include the extension of the lower VAT rate for accommodation services until 2035 (just voted down by the National Council and now with the Council of States), repeated debates on the deductibility of childcare expenses and Pillar 3a contributions, and discussions surrounding cantonal inheritance and gift tax exemptions. In the CIT field, the introduction of patent boxes and research and development (R&D) super-deductions at the cantonal level illustrates the dynamics of TE policy-making involving different tiers of government as this has been triggered by the Federal Act on Tax Reform and AHV Financing (TRAF).

Peter Hongler is a professor of tax law at the University of St. Gallen. 
Agustin Redonda is a Senior Fellow with the Council on Economic Policies (CEP), where he leads CEP’s work on
tax expenditures and tax incentives. He is also the co-founder and co-director of the Tax Expenditures Lab, which
hosts the Global Tax Expenditures Database (GTED) and the Global Tax Expenditures Transparency Index (GTETI).