Tag: Eigenmietwert

Owner-occupied rental value not until 2029

In the fall of 2025, the Swiss population voted clearly in favor of abolishing the imputed rental value. The fictitious rental income that homeowners have had to declare as taxable income for decades, even though not a single franc flows in, has thus become politically obsolete. However, it took the Federal Council until the end of March 2026 to set a date for its entry into force and it ended up in 2029.

Mountain cantons put the brakes on
After the vote, Federal Councillor and Finance Minister Karin Keller-Sutter still mentioned 2028 as the earliest possible date. The mountain cantons, including Valais, pushed for 2030, as they need time to introduce a new tax on second homes to compensate for their tax losses. The year 2029 is the result of this trial of strength.

70 million franc hole
The canton of Valais alone is expecting tax losses of over 70 million francs as a result of the reform. The new property tax for second homes is intended to close this gap. But its implementation is complex. Cadastral values are outdated and the definition of second homes for private use is unclear. The question of whether the municipalities or the canton will levy the new tax is still open.

Homeowners are outraged
The Valais homeowners’ association campaigned strongly for the abolition of the tax during the referendum campaign. Association director Reinhard Meichtry commented on the Federal Council’s decision, saying that he initially believed it was an April Fool’s joke and that the decision was “absolutely unacceptable”. Meichtry announced that he would apply to the Federal Council for a rejection and also doubted the seriousness of the communicated tax loss figures.

What applies now
The current system will remain unchanged until the end of 2028. Owners continue to declare the imputed rental value and can deduct mortgage interest and maintenance costs. Anyone planning major renovations or mortgage adjustments should make strategic use of this transition phase, as most of these deductions will no longer apply when the system changes in 2029.

April 2026
Zurich reintroduces hardship clause for imputed rental value

The cantonal council approved the reintroduction of the hardship clause at second reading by 136 votes to 29. The aim is to prevent situations in which homeowners have to sell their home due to rising imputed rental values and tax burdens. This was triggered by a Federal Supreme Court ruling that overturned the previous legal basis.

Finance Director Ernst Stocker subsequently deleted the old clause, but applied for a new transitional regulation until the imputed rental value is completely abolished. Following the referendum in September to abolish the imputed rental value, the regulation will only be in place for a few more years.

Political controversy
While there was broad support, the Greens, AL and EVP rejected the model. They criticized the fact that tax relief does not have to be repaid in the event of inheritance and saw this as unequal treatment compared to tenants. However, the corresponding repayment proposal was clearly defeated.

The government council still has to decide on Stocker’s transitional regulation. Both measures, the hardship clause and the transitional regulation, only apply until the anticipated abolition of the imputed rental value in 2027 or 2028. Zurich is thus sending a clear signal for a socially responsible property policy during the transitional phase of the tax reform.

November 2025
Promoting ownership instead of preventing it

Switzerland is and remains the land of tenants. For many, the dream of owning their own home is receding further and further into the distance. Rising prices, higher interest rates and stricter mortgage regulations have made home ownership unattainable for broad sections of the population. Young families and people on middle incomes in particular are increasingly failing to overcome the hurdles of the system. Yet home ownership is much more than a status symbol. It is a form of retirement provision, a contribution to personal responsibility and stability in an increasingly uncertain time. Living in your own four walls saves costs in the long term and reduces the burden on the pension system.

The abolition of the imputed rental value is therefore not a dam break, but a necessary door opener. It puts an end to an injustice in which fictitious income is taxed that does not actually exist. The criticism that this would create “tax loopholes” falls short of the mark. It is crucial that the reform is implemented with clear and fair rules.

Will this turn Switzerland into a country of privileged owners? No, on the contrary. Only by reducing the imputed rental value will we create the conditions for more people to take the step into property ownership in the first place. The goal must be: property for the many instead of privileges for the few.

Support yes, nationalization no
The primary goal of a sensible housing policy must be the creation of suitable and affordable living space. However, the state cannot achieve this alone. Public building authorities are often cumbersome, inflexible and expensive. In cities such as Zurich, it can be seen that increasing nationalization of the housing market is leading to bottlenecks and an artificial shortage.

We need private developers who can react quickly and efficiently to the needs of the population. The task of the state is not to build itself, but to create the right framework conditions: faster approval procedures, flexible conversions and planning that allows rather than prevents innovation.

A modern instrument would be a change in the system of state housing subsidies. Away from subsidies for buildings and towards housing vouchers for people who actually need support. In this way, help can be targeted to where it is needed without distorting the market.

How much government does the real estate world still need and how much market can it tolerate? The answer is simple: the state should set frameworks, but not build walls. It should create incentives, not block them.

Looking ahead
The abolition of the imputed rental value is not an isolated step, but part of a larger development: towards more personal responsibility, fair opportunities for tenants seeking ownership and a functioning housing market based on trust and innovation, not bureaucracy.

Whether this becomes the first domino for further tax relief depends on political will. But one thing is certain: those who want to strengthen people in their own four walls are strengthening the foundations of our country.

October 2025
New momentum for real estate funds

For real estate funds, the reform seems unspectacular at first glance. Their properties are rented out, the rental income generated from them is still taxable and imputed rental value has never played a role here. Institutional investors therefore continue to pay tax on real income and not on fictitious income.

The situation is completely different for owners of owner-occupied residential property. They benefit directly, provided their mortgage burden is low. This shift increases the attractiveness of home ownership and could further fuel demand for owner-occupied apartments and single-family homes.

Price increases in a weak yield environment
The move away from the imputed rental value comes at a time when yields on real estate investments have already fallen back to a low level. Rising demand for owner-occupied residential property is likely to push up prices. A scenario that puts additional pressure on project developers. Their calculations are becoming tighter, while investors and funds are simultaneously confronted with stagnating rental yields.

An increase in prices also has an impact on the valuation of real estate portfolios. Funds with high market values could see lower initial yields as a result. This is a development that institutional investors will be watching closely.

Tax policy countermeasures conceivable
According to estimates, the abolition of the imputed rental value will lead to annual tax losses of around CHF 1.8 billion. One third of this will affect the federal government and two thirds the cantons. Experts such as Emanuel von Graffenried from BN Conseils warn that the cantons could partially compensate for this loss with new taxes.

In particular, the introduction of a cantonal property tax is being discussed. Should such a tax become a reality, not only private owners would be affected, but also institutional investors and real estate funds. The reform would therefore indirectly impose an additional burden on the professional real estate sector, albeit with a time lag.

Long-term market consequences for funds
Even if the abolition of the imputed rental value is not a direct tax issue for funds, it will affect the environment in which they operate. Rising residential property prices, higher land values and a tightening rental market are changing the valuation basis for real estate investments.

Experts expect that residential real estate funds in particular will have to make adjustments to their portfolio structure in the medium term. At the same time, tax policy steps by the cantons will change the attractiveness of individual locations. This is an aspect that is also likely to be important for the investment decisions of institutional investors in the future.

October 2025
Farewell to imputed rental value

The adoption of the bill on the cantonal property tax for second homes marks the end of the imputed rental value. However, the change will take effect in two to three years at the earliest and will fundamentally change the everyday lives of many of those affected. Not only owners of owner-occupied and rented properties will feel the effects, but also households with debts without property ownership.

Simplifications and exemptions
With the abolition of the imputed rental value, maintenance costs and debt interest will also no longer be tax-deductible. However, to make it easier to purchase residential property, special rules apply for the first ten years after purchase. Debt interest of up to CHF 10,000 for married couples and CHF 5,000 for single persons is still deductible, but the remaining maximum amount is reduced by ten percent per year.

Tax declarations will be simpler and the tax burden for many homeowners will fall in the current interest rate environment. Value-preserving and value-enhancing costs should be properly documented, as in future they can only be claimed when property gains tax is paid, i.e. when the property is sold.

More restrictions on the deduction of debt interest
Owners of investment properties are particularly affected by the reform. Interest on debt can now only be deducted in proportion to the value of the property in relation to total assets. This increases the tax burden and significantly limits the previous advantages.

Taxpayers without real estate
Households without real estate are also affected. Private debt interest, for example for loans or small loans, may no longer be offset against tax in future. This turns previous practice on its head and may lead to higher tax payments.

Uncertainties and cantonal competence
The cantons will have the option of levying a special property tax on second homes. This is a particularly sensitive issue for regions with a high level of tourism, as new taxes can affect the attractiveness of the market. It remains to be seen what the specific assessment bases will look like and which cantons will make use of the new options.

The cantons can continue to allow temporary deductions for energy-efficient renovations and environmental protection measures until 2050. It is not yet known which cantons will offer this.

Strategies for mortgages and investments
The reform not only affects the tax rate, but also personal financial strategies. The question of how high mortgages should be set in future and whether amortization makes sense is becoming increasingly important. Anyone who uses capital for amortization ties it up in the property and loses liquidity for other purposes such as retirement provision or new investments. The decision on the optimal financing therefore requires individual consideration.

Effects on the real estate market
Whether the reform affects prices depends above all on the situation of new buyers, the majority of whom are highly mortgaged. According to SNB statistics, 40 percent of newly purchased homes are financed at over 74 percent of their value. Older properties in particular continue to lose tax advantages due to the limited deduction options. New condominiums in the canton of Zurich are on average 20 years old, single-family homes even around 50 years old. The fundamental challenges of high prices and scarce funds for acquisition remain unresolved by the reform.

The abolition of the imputed rental value promotes the price difference between new buildings and older properties. Second homes are likely to become less attractive as a result of the new property tax, but experts do not expect prices for vacation homes to fall, as the supply shortage is too great.

Prices for Swiss homes could rise by 4% this year and 4% next year, and by as much as 4.5% in the canton of Zurich. Renovating and maintaining the value of old buildings is becoming more important than ever, but not every investment pays off. Homeowners need to keep a keen eye on their long-term strategy: Is refurbishment worthwhile or is a new replacement building imminent?

Reform as a joint project
The changes are based on a close link between legislative and constitutional amendments. The abolition of the imputed rental value will only come into force if the referendum on the new property tax on second homes is successful. Parliament discussed the scope and form of the tax intensively for months. In tourist cantons in particular, there is a great deal of skepticism as to whether reduced revenue can be offset by new taxes. The laws come into force together, a reform with many facets.

Tax and financial effects at a glance
The mortgage interest rate determines whether owners benefit. If interest rates are low, the tax burden falls for the majority. If interest rates are high, taxes increase because interest on debt can hardly be deducted any more. For the public sector, the reform could result in a loss of revenue of CHF 1.8 billion. From 3 percent mortgage interest, however, additional revenue is possible for the state as a whole. The actual effects remain unclear for the time being due to various uncertainties.

September 2025
Renovation incentives secure energy targets and the construction industry

The building stock plays a key role in reducing emissions and closing the winter electricity gap. Energy modernization measures such as better insulation or the replacement of fossil fuel heating systems with heat pumps are key levers for achieving energy and climate targets. However, without targeted incentives, the necessary momentum to trigger investments on a large scale is lacking.

Criticism of the imputed rental value bill
The bill to be voted on on September 28 not only provides for the abolition of the imputed rental value, but also the elimination of deductions for building maintenance and energy-related investments. Bauenschweiz warns that this threatens to put a stop to renovations, with serious consequences for local SMEs in the construction and crafts sector and for climate protection. Instead of creating incentives, such a system change would prevent renovations, weaken the trade and place a burden on SMEs.

Study shows enormous efficiency potential
A recent study by Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts and FLUMROC illustrates just how great the opportunities are. A combination of heat pumps and an optimized building envelope could reduce electricity consumption in Switzerland by 5.3 terawatt hours per year. This could cover almost ten percent of total consumption and practically close the winter electricity gap.

Switzerland is at a turning point in its energy policy. Instead of creating barriers to investment, we need framework conditions that promote energy-efficient renovations, strengthen the construction industry and fully exploit the contribution of the building stock to the climate transition.

August 2025
A decisive vote for Switzerland

On September 28, 2025, the Swiss people will vote on the abolition of the imputed rental value. The imputed rental value is a notional income that owners of owner-occupied properties must declare in their tax return. This value corresponds to around 60 to 70 percent of the rent that could be earned for the property. The abolition of the imputed rental value is linked to the introduction of a new property tax on second homes in order to compensate for potential tax losses for the cantons.

Linked decisions and cantonal differences
The vote on the abolition of the imputed rental value is closely linked to the introduction of a cantonal property tax on second properties. This tax is subject to a mandatory referendum, which means that the imputed rental value will only be abolished if the people and cantons approve the new tax. The voting results could vary greatly between the cantons, as the impact varies greatly from canton to canton.

The Central Board of the Swiss Federation of Master Builders has decided to abstain from voting, as the pro and contra arguments are balanced from a national perspective. Almost 1.4 million households in Switzerland would be affected by the abolition, which corresponds to around a third of all households. The reduction in tax revenue is estimated at CHF 1.7 billion per year1.

Effects on renovations and tax deductions
The abolition of the imputed rental value would also mean that deductions for maintenance costs such as energy-related renovations for owner-occupied residential property would no longer apply at federal level. However, at cantonal level, deductions for dismantling costs for replacement new builds, expenses for monument preservation and energy-saving measures would remain permissible. It remains uncertain to what extent the lack of deductibility will actually lead to a reduction in renovations, as the tax burden for property owners would also fall thanks to the abolition of the imputed rental value.

Property tax on secondary properties
The introduction of property tax on secondary properties is intended to help the cantons compensate for any tax losses. Each canton can decide for itself whether it actually introduces this tax and to what extent. The abolition of the imputed rental value has been the subject of political debate for decades and has so far survived every attack. in 2017, parliament made a new attempt to abolish the imputed rental value4.

A hotly contested vote
The vote on the abolition of the imputed rental value and the introduction of property tax on second homes is likely to lead to a hotly contested vote. The bill is linked to the Federal Act on the System Change in Home Ownership Taxation. Only if the constitutional amendment is approved by the people and the cantons in the referendum can the bill for the change in the system of residential property taxation and thus the abolition of imputed rental value taxation come into force.

The Swiss Homeowners’ Association has already decided to vote in favor of the proposal. The abolition of the imputed rental value tax is considered to be long overdue. The “Eigenmietwert-Nein” committee also recommends a Yes vote on the bill to abolish the imputed rental value tax.

August 2025
Raiffeisen analyses abolition of imputed rental value

Raiffeisen has analysed the planned abolition of the taxation of imputed rental value for owner-occupied residential property. In the winter session in December, the Federal Parliament decided to change the system of home ownership taxation. Now the people have the final say at the ballot box, according to a press release from Switzerland’s second-largest banking group.

If the proposal is accepted, homeowners would realise considerable tax savings in some cases, depending on the type of household, given the prevailing low interest rates. The housing cost advantage of home ownership over renting is growing steadily and could rise to up to 30 per cent over the course of the year.

If the imputed rental value were to be abolished, home ownership would become noticeably more financially attractive overall in the current market environment and consequently also increase in value, according to Raiffeisen. However, homes in need of renovation are likely to lose value due to the elimination of deferred tax deductions as a result of the reform.

“One of the potential losers of the reform is the construction industry. Although it is likely to benefit from many last-minute orders in the short term during the transitional phase until the reform comes into force, in the long term fewer funds will flow into the renovation of residential buildings due to the elimination of a large proportion of tax maintenance deductions,” Fredy Hasenmaile, Chief Economist at Raiffeisen Switzerland, is quoted as saying.

If the prevailing interest rate environment remains unchanged, the tax authorities would also have to reckon with billions in lower revenues for years to come as a result of the reform.

February 2025
Standstill in the owner-occupied rental value debate

The abolition of the imputed rental value, a tax that is unique in Europe, is in danger of failing once again. There is broad agreement in both councils that the system needs to be reformed. However, its implementation remains highly controversial. The issues of property tax for second homes and the debt interest deduction in particular are causing conflict.

In its third deliberation on Thursday, the Council of States maintained the abolition of the imputed rental value for primary residences only. It also maintained its position on the debt interest deduction. In future, deductions of up to 70 per cent of taxable property income should remain permitted. The National Council, on the other hand, is calling for a complete system change and also wants to exempt second homes from tax.

Tourism cantons put the brakes on
The majority rejection in the Council of States is primarily due to the concerns of the tourism cantons. They fear a considerable loss of revenue due to the abolition of the imputed rental value for second homes. The proposal of a property tax to compensate for this has met with resistance there. “We need to focus on primary residences,” emphasised Martin Schmid (FDP/GR). The introduction of a property tax would present “extremely high hurdles”, as it would require a constitutional amendment with a double majority.

Realistic collapse of the bill
The collapse of the bill seems increasingly likely. Even the abolition of the imputed rental value for primary residences is facing headwinds. The tenants’ association has already announced a referendum. Its president, Carlo Sommaruga (SP/GE), criticised the bill as a “tax giveaway for rich homeowners” that does not solve the inequality between tenants and owners.

Doubts are also growing within the centre-right parties. Pascal Broulis (FDP/VD) warned that the bill would unnecessarily complicate the tax system. The National Council must first decide on the bill again before a possible conciliation conference could follow. However, there is currently no majority solution in sight.

December 2024
"The merger of Immoscout24 and Homegate could be a case for WEKO"

Mr. Egloff, to what extent do you benefit from your law studies for your work as President of the Homeowners’ Association (HEV) of Switzerland and the Canton of Zurich?
It’s definitely helpful. The homeowner has legal problems and questions to solve again and again: From the classic area of ownership to taxes, land register to neighborhood and tenancy law, there is a wide range that is important for our members. We offer our members free legal advice – this is used very actively. But I also benefit from my legal background in political discourse.

The abolition of the imputed rental value is currently being discussed again at the political level. Can you briefly name the disadvantages that this causes for homeowners and who is most affected?
The imputed rental value is taxed on a fictitious income. Homeowners therefore have to pay tax on 60 to 70 percent of the potential market rent as income for their property – notably one that they do not generate in practice. This amount is in addition to regular income. This often means that those affected slide into the higher or even highest progression and thus have to pay a significantly higher amount of tax. Older homeowners in particular are negatively affected by the current practice. They have often paid off their debts so that the debt interest deduction is no longer relevant to them.

How confident are you of the reform going through this time?
The imputed rental value was introduced 100 years ago as a war tax. This was then repeatedly extended for a limited period until it became established as a fixed tax. We have been trying to abolish imputed rental value for 25 years. 10 years ago I was once very confident that we could be successful. The project is now up and running again, but I am not sure that it will succeed.

Where do you see the problems?
On the one hand, homeowners represent a minority in the voting population. On the other hand, people like having homeowners as taxpayers – the state is reluctant to do without them. There is probably no perfect solution in this case.

Energy law initiator Martin Neukom from the Greens said that, according to a survey in the city of Zurich, less than half of the homeowners had considered alternatives to oil and gas when replacing their heating system and that binding rules were therefore needed for the replacement. What do you think of this argument?
In recent years, energy and heating issues have been a topic in every publication of HEV Switzerland and the HEV of the Canton of Zurich. Our members have a high level of information in this regard. Greenhouse gas emissions have fallen by 34 percent over the past 30 years. And this despite the fact that living space has increased by 46 percent over the same period. Our members invest CHF 20 billion in building maintenance every year – CHF 9.5 billion each for energy-related renovations. These figures show that homeowners do take their responsibility seriously.

The City of Zurich Tenants’ Association invalidated other arguments against the planned energy law, i.e. possible evictions, forced house sales or rent increases: the energy law does not force homeowners to comprehensively renovate properties and terminate tenancies. Were the arguments advanced by the HEV and your party, the SVP, misleading?
The Energy Act forces property owners to replace fossil fuel heating systems with ones using renewable energies over time. Let’s take a property from the 1960s with oil heating as a technical example. If this goes out, the owner must have a heat pump installed. With this property, which is already getting on in years, this only makes sense if the building shell is renovated at the same time. If, for example, the flow temperature is no longer reached with old radiators, floor heating must also be installed. On the one hand, this leads to enormous costs. On the other hand, these renovations cannot be carried out with the tenant in the apartment.

«
Inside the building-
area are
we also without
legal
regulations 2050
net zero
»

And what do you say about the political point of view?
In June of this year, the President of the Swiss Tenants’ Association, Carlo Sommaruga, submitted a proposal in Bern in which he literally called for “measures under tenancy law against vacant notices in connection with energy-related renovations”. In my opinion, if the arguments we have put forward were misleading, such an approach would not be necessary.

What contribution do you think homeowners could make to achieve the climate goals?
I believe in personal responsibility, and the figures I mentioned above confirm that this is taken seriously. If one also draws the lowering path of the CO2
If we push further in the building sector, you can see that we can easily achieve the climate goals of the Paris Agreement. In 2050 we will be at net zero. I therefore find a state-defined regulation superfluous in this case.

How important and forward-looking do you personally think electromobility is?
In principle, I am in favor of electromobility. But it brings with it many challenges. On the one hand, we have gaps in the energy supply. We cannot produce enough electricity on our own. That means we have to get nuclear power from France and coal power from Germany. On the other hand, the embodied energy in electromobility is relatively high. No sustainable solution has yet been found for the disposal of the corresponding batteries. For me, there are still a lot of unanswered questions on this topic.

According to a study by the consulting firm EBP, an intensified sale of e-cars fails in terms of electromobility, among other things due to the lack of charging stations in properties. Why do homeowners find it difficult to carry out such an installation?
A private homeowner who needs a charging station for himself will certainly not find it difficult to have it installed. As long as he has the wherewithal to do so. But if you have an apartment building with twelve apartments and an underground car park with ten parking spaces, the question arises as to how many charging stations you should actually install. And who pays for the investment if no tenant has an electric car afterwards? In such a case, the tenant is unlikely to agree to a rent increase. In addition, there is an increasing trend towards car-free housing estates – especially in urban areas. Installing charging stations would make no sense here. Experience has shown that the market regulates many things on its own.

Can you elaborate on the last point?
About 50 years ago you suddenly couldn’t rent an apartment if it didn’t have a bathtub. Or 30 years ago the scenario with apartments without a dishwasher was repeated. I am assuming that future demand will also influence supply when it comes to electromobility. At some point you will no longer be able to rent out an apartment if you cannot offer the tenant a solution tailored to their mobility needs.

How do you assess the real estate bubble that UBS has been predicting for some time and that Zurich in particular is said to be badly affected by?
With regard to interest rate and real estate price developments, I see one constant: the forecasts have always been wrong in recent years. The UBS index has been predicting this bubble for years – it has never burst so far. I personally see a strong real estate market with rising prices. Caution is certainly required when financing home ownership. Especially in the home sector. The portability regulations must be checked individually and comprehensively. Otherwise, a sudden sharp rise in interest rates could pose existential problems for one or the other.

«
an interest
Many countries cannot afford to increase
»

Is there a massive rise in interest rates?
The countries that are relevant for this, ie the EU and the USA, cannot afford an interest rate hike. On the other hand, we see clear signs of rising inflation – this could have an impact. For the real estate market, however, inflation usually means rising prices – because in this situation the need for material assets increases.

You have retired from active politics. Which achievements would you describe as your personal milestones?
My greatest success was definitely the abolition of inheritance and gift taxes for direct descendants in the canton of Zurich. I consider the abolition of the real estate transfer tax, which we brought about with a popular initiative, to be the second major success.

And what milestones have you reached in the real estate industry?
Here I would mention the good contact and exchange between the various real estate organizations. In my early days as President of HEV Switzerland, everyone primarily tilled their own little garden. It was important to me to maintain an exchange and to define common goals. Today we meet four times a year in the Federal Palace and discuss current political dossiers.

Two major players have joined forces with Immoscout24 and Homegate. How do you rate this event?
I’m not sure if this merger is a win for consumers. I assume that we will have to reckon with massive price increases in the future. This case should at most concern the Competition Commission (WEKO).

February 2022
Mountain cantons insist on imputed rental value

The intergovernmental conference of the mountain cantons of Uri, Obwalden, Nidwalden, Glarus, Appenzell Innerrhoden, Graubünden, Ticino and Valais (RKGK) is against the Federal Council’s plan to abolish imputed rental value for second homes as well. It would result in a loss of income of around CHF 200 million a year, explains the RKGK in a press release. On the other hand, the RKGK has no objections to the planned abolition of the imputed rental value for main apartments.

The mountain cantons have already been hit by the Second Home Act of decisive economic effects, writes the RKGK. In contrast to the Federal Council, the mountain cantons see further need for action here. Specifically, provisions are to be changed, “the application of which leads to objectively negative results or leaves insufficient scope for innovative solutions”.

The RKGK is also calling for improvements to the message passed by the Federal Council on electricity supply with renewable energies. Among other things, the mountain cantons want to have extended the current maximum water rate. With electricity prices rising as a result of climate policy, the electricity companies are still “in a position to pay today’s water rates without any problems,” argues the RKGK.

Furthermore, the RKGK criticizes the approach to the Postal Organization Act: Here the Federal Council has pushed ahead with a message without waiting for the results of an expert commission it has set up itself. However, the responsible commission in the Council of States has postponed its deliberations until the results have been presented. “Against this background, it cannot be tolerated in any way if Swiss Post continues to dismantle its services in the run-up to the political discussion,” says the RKGK.

September 2021
Federal Council advocates abolishing imputed rental value

The Federal Council is in favor of abolishing the imputed rental value. He recommends Parliament to respond to a corresponding submission by the Commission for Economy and Taxes of the Council of States ( WAK-S ), informs the Federal Council in a communication . At the same time, however, the Federal Council advocates three changes to the bill.

According to the Council of States commission, the imputed rental value should only be abolished for owner-occupied residential property at the place of residence. In return, expenses and in particular mortgage interest for real estate should no longer be tax-deductible.

The Federal Council, on the other hand, also wants to abolish the imputed rental value on second properties. Expenses and debt interest should continue to be tax deductible if they are used on real estate used to generate income, such as renting. In addition, the Federal Council proposes that tax incentives for energy-efficient renovations be retained until 2050. In the proposal, this is linked to the CO2 law, which was rejected by the electorate.

The Swiss Homeowners Association (HEV) agrees with two of the three demands of the Federal Council. He was “delighted” that the Federal Council “confirmed the urgent need for trade to abolish imputed rental value taxation,” writes the umbrella association of homeowners and landlords in a message . Like the Federal Council, the HEV is in favor of partially maintaining the debt interest deduction and linking the promotion of energy-efficient renovation to the 2050 climate target. However, the abolition of the imputed rental value of second properties has already met with strong rejection from the “tourism cantons” in the past, writes the HEV.

August 2021