Lampart wants fairer distribution of OECD tax: “It’s worth a no for married couples”

class=”sc-29f61514-0 kHgAwW”>

For leftists and unions, it’s almost a losing battle: in the latest SRG trend survey, only 12 percent oppose the OECD minimum tax. However, 84 percent want to accept the proposal and 4 percent have doubts.

But the left does not want to give up the fight for a no. She is not concerned with the minimum tax of 15 percent for large companies, but with the way the money is distributed. Of the CHF 1 to 2.5 billion in additional revenue, only a quarter goes to the federal government, three quarters to the cantons.

The heart of the matter: the cantons in which many large companies are located – especially Zug and Basel-Stadt – will receive extra money. Most cantons get almost nothing.

“Fairer distribution possible”

This is where the criticism of the chief economist of the trade union federation Daniel Lampart (54) comes into play: “Revenues from the minimum tax mainly flow to the financially strong cantons – where tax cuts are planned for the well-to-do.” he complains. Thus, the wealthy and high earners in individual cantons would benefit from the additional tax revenue rather than the general public.

“That’s unfair,” says Lampart. “A fairer distribution would be possible.” He refers to the distribution key, which is used, for example, for direct federal taxes. 78.8 percent goes to the federal government, the cantons have just over a fifth.

Alternative scenario calculated

Lampart has calculated an alternative scenario how the money could be distributed more fairly. In a first calculation, he looked at how much money a family with children would receive, for example, if the cantons were to receive their share according to the three-quarters rule adopted by parliament. The one-quarter federal share would not apply, as these funds are for location promotion.

Lampart, on the other hand, presents the variant where the cantons would each keep only about a fifth of the extra tax revenue from “their” large companies and distribute it to the canton’s population. At the same time, the remaining nearly 80 percent, which the federal government gets, would be divided equally among the Swiss population as a whole.

“200 to 400 francs more”

The result: “Couples with children would have 200 to 400 francs more money in most cantons,” said the chief economist of the SGB. At 840 francs per year, that would be the most in the canton of Geneva. In Vaud and Baselland it would still be 600 francs. In Zurich it would still be 280 francs or in Uri 200 francs.

It would be a zero-sum game in Neuchâtel and Nidwalden. In comparison, people in Aargau, Basel-Stadt and Zug are doing worse. Especially in the last two cantons, where many large companies are located, the population would suffer. In Lampart’s model, for example, the Zug family would receive about 5,000 francs less, those in Basel 4,000 francs.

“Families would benefit”

For Lampart, however, one thing is clear: “Family in cantons with fewer resources would especially benefit, where many today already have to watch money closely.” The money could be distributed even more fairly socially and politically if it were used, for example, to reduce health care premiums. “Then the balance for lower- and middle-income families would be even better.”

The SGB man is convinced: “It pays off for married couples to say no for once.” If no, the template must be reopened quickly. Because: “The reform is actually a good thing,” says Lampart. “But the allocation key must be corrected, the new tax must now be used to improve purchasing power.” The voter will decide on June 18.

Source:Blick