class=”sc-29f61514-0 icZBHN”>
The Grand Chamber took its decision by 103 votes in favor and 73 against, with eight abstentions. The Council of States had already decided not to participate in the winter session of 2022. Now the template is off the table.
With the change in the law, the Federal Council implemented a motion by Jean-Pierre Grin, national councilor of the Vaudois SVP, which had been referred by parliament – he himself rejected the idea.
The plan was to increase the maximum deduction for insurance premiums and interest on savings capital for singles from 1,800 to 3,000 francs. A lump sum deduction of 6,000 instead of 3,600 francs should now be possible for married couples and a lump sum deduction of 1,200 instead of 700 francs for children or dependent people.
With the decision, the National Council followed the request of a narrow majority of its Committee for Economic Affairs and Taxes (WAK-N). The Finance Committee was also against higher deductions.
On the one hand, the argument was based on the tense financial situation of the federal government. The Finance Committee expected that the legislative changes would result in a revenue drop of approximately 315 million francs for the federal government and 85 million francs for the cantons. This is intolerable.
Moreover, opponents of higher deductibles argued that it was wrong to mainly reduce the burden on higher income classes. About 40 percent of taxpayers pay no direct federal taxes because of their low income and would not benefit from a new arrangement.
Kathrin Bertschy (GLP/BE) said on behalf of WAK-N that the project was not subsidized. This would excessively limit Parliament’s reach. “Moderation is necessary,” said Markus Ritter (Center/SG) on behalf of his group. A lot has happened in the field of financial policy since the Grins motion was adopted before the start of the corona pandemic. Nearly 50 percent of the aid would benefit the ten percent of the population with the highest income. If the debt brake cannot be met, pressure to cut back on weakly tied expenditures such as agriculture, education and the military will increase, Ritter says.
Jacqueline Badran (SP/ZH) said the proposal would achieve virtually nothing for individual households. For mid-sized companies, this wouldn’t even mean a good bottle of wine: “We might as well throw the money out the window.” However, a minority of the WAK-N from the ranks of the SVP and the FDP considered tax reductions appropriate. She pointed out that the upper middle class accounts for a large share of tax revenues.
Thomas Aeschi (SVP/ZG) contrasted the expected shortfall in revenues with expenditure in the asylum system. It’s about doing something for the local population. Beat Walti (FDP/ZH) accused Ritter of using a ‘socialist argument’. He countered that Walti promoted the de-solidarization of society. (SDA)
Source:Blick
I am Liam Livingstone and I work in a news website. My main job is to write articles for the 24 Instant News. My specialty is covering politics and current affairs, which I’m passionate about. I have worked in this field for more than 5 years now and it’s been an amazing journey. With each passing day, my knowledge increases as well as my experience of the world we live in today.
