Tip the farmers on the pension reform?

Now comes the denouement of the reform of the pension fund. In the spring session, parliament decides on the reform of occupational pensions (BVG). The left and trade unions have already announced the referendum. But now the bill could already fail in parliament.

Because critical voices can also be heard in the bourgeois camp. Especially with the farmers. “What is currently on the table will be incredibly costly for our industry,” Boerenbond chairman and central national councilor Markus Ritter (55, SG) told Blick. “Discontent is high in various low-wage industries.”

Higher salary contributions

Because with the variants under discussion, the insured salary is increased enormously, especially for lower incomes. On the one hand, there are signs of a lowering of the entry threshold from where the pension fund becomes mandatory – which would mean that around 140,000 employees would be newly insured and 60,000 people would be better insured. On the other hand, the so-called coordination deduction should also decrease, which would also lead to a higher wage bill.

With financial consequences for employers and employees: wage premiums also rise with the insured wage total. In addition, the premium percentages will be adjusted. Depending on the model, these adjustments alone would result in an additional inflow of approximately CHF 1.6 to 2.3 billion into the pension funds.

Costs frightened farmers

“Depending on the variant, the farmers have to deal with additional costs of 41 to 77 percent,” Ritter calculates. “These numbers scared us. This is huge for our industry and significantly increases costs, especially for specialty crops.”

Moreover, the employees would hardly benefit from it either. “For low earners, the costs in the second pillar will be hugely increased without any added value in old age,” Ritter complains. “Anyone who earns 35,000 francs a year has to pay more than 1,000 francs annually and then still does not receive noticeably more. The small incomes have a very difficult time in the BVG. »

In the run-up to the decisions, the farmers’ union, together with other trade associations, mediated in politics. In vain. “We tried to find a middle ground, but the letters didn’t help.”

The farmer’s board will decide next week

Next week, the board of the farmers’ association will meet to decide whether or not to support the proposal in the final vote. “Given the mixed situation, I don’t give the reform a great chance, there is a risk that it will fall,” says Ritter. “If it does not fail in parliament, then in a referendum at the latest.”

In fact, it cannot be ruled out that the proposal will fall in the spring session. The National Council decides on Tuesday, where the left-green camp receives 69 of the 200 votes. Not much is missing until the majority of 100 votes against. Then farmers can quickly take decisive action to undo the pension reform.

FDP-Noser: “I’m still against it”

There may also be resistance from the commercial side. “There are different voices in our association,” says Fabio Regazzi (60, TI), president of the industry association and mid-national council member. “Some industries are not satisfied with the solution, but there is always a willingness to compromise.” The association awaits the parliamentary decision before taking a position.

There are also critical voices among the liberals. One of them is the Zurich Council of States Ruedi Noser (61). “The phase of low interest rates is over. The BVG reform is therefore no longer as urgent as it used to be,” he previously told Blick. And now he makes it clear: “I’m still against it.”

Tactical Considerations in the Election Year

Behind the scenes, people also hear that the BVG proposal could also be rejected in the final vote for tactical reasons. Because the referendum would be a welcome campaign gift to the left.

Some bourgeoisie question whether the left should be offered this platform “in the middle of the election year”. Especially since the BVG reform has little chance of success at the ballot box.

Source:Blick