Switzerland rejects EU border rules

Context

In brief

• Swiss parliament rejects adoption of new EU rules
• The Chiesa motion had passed on 17 September
• The estimated expenditure is up to 900 million francs per year
• The threshold is 22 uninterrupted weeks

Key Facts

• Decision → refusal to transpose European rules
• Proposer → Marco Chiesa, Ticino Councillor of States
• Vote in the National Council → 109 in favour, 72 against, 5 abstentions
• New criterion → application in the State of last employment
• Threshold → at least 22 weeks uninterrupted
• Annual estimate → between CHF 600 million and CHF 900 million

The Swiss vote on allowances

The Swiss Parliament has formalized the rejection of the implementation of the new European rules on unemployment benefits for cross-border workers. The decision comes after the motion by Ticino Councillor of States Marco Chiesa was approved by the National Council on 17 September, with 109 votes in favour, 72 against and 5 abstentions.

The political request stems from the revision of the European regulations that coordinate social security systems, definitively approved by the Council of the European Union. The disputed point is the criterion used to identify the country called upon to pay the benefit. Today, according to the source, financial assistance is due to the country of residence of the cross-border commuter; the state in which the activity took place guarantees only a partial and limited reimbursement in time.

The European rule and the Swiss position

The European reform provides that those who have accumulated at least 22 uninterrupted weeks of work can apply for compensation directly from the state of their last job. The conditions provided for by the legislation of that state remain applicable. For a cross-border commuter, the transition would therefore shift the focus of the procedure from the country of residence to the country where the last job was carried out, but the motion asks not to incorporate this approach into the Agreement on the Free Movement of Persons, the AFMP.

The estimated impact for Switzerland concerns unemployment insurance: the Confederation indicates a possible additional cost of between 600 and 900 million francs per year. SECO points out that the projections are inherently uncertain. Marco Chiesa described the adoption as a transfer of costs to the Swiss coffers, not as a simple technical adjustment.

The issue particularly affects the Canton of Ticino, where the presence of cross-border workers is high. Parliament does not dispute the sovereignty of the European Union to change its domestic law: it asks the Federal Council to exclude the transposition of the rules into the AFMP. To follow the evolution of the measure, the reader can consult the in-depth study on disoccupazione dei frontalieri.

Operational details

From reimbursement to application in the State of employment

For the cross-border commuter, the reform described by the source would change above all the administrative point of reference. It would no longer be the place of residence that determines, in the cases envisaged, the country called upon to pay the allowance: after at least 22 uninterrupted weeks, the application would be submitted directly in the country of the last job.

What would change in management

The difference does not only affect where the application is to be submitted. If Switzerland were to be responsible, an unemployed person living abroad would have to comply fully with the Swiss employment rules. The RAVs would be called upon to monitor the availability of work and the search for employment across the border. The practice would therefore directly involve the local services even if the person does not reside in Switzerland.

For the Canton of Ticino, the consequence described by the source is twofold. On the one hand, local structures would find themselves managing practices referring to residents in neighboring countries, with a greater administrative burden. On the other hand, the possible system could change employment incentives and make the Swiss labor market even more attractive for foreign workers. It is not just a matter of accounting for a benefit: it would change the relationship between access to benefits, placement obligations and place of last employment.

The text provided does not describe effects on G permit, AHV, VVG, KVG, rebates, withholding tax or double taxation: these issues remain outside the documented perimeter. The analysis concerns the European coordination of unemployment and its possible application in Switzerland. To read the comparison with an operational cut, the guide on disoccupazione dei frontalieri is available.

Useful planning tools

To estimate your pension strategy, use the pension planner and the pillar 3 simulator.

Key points

How to check the applicable scenario

For the cross-border commuter, the possible action with the available data is to separate the current situation, the European threshold and the institutional transition. The following path remains within the framework described by the source.

Four steps

1. Start with the current rule. Financial assistance is the responsibility of the country of residence, while the country in which the activity took place guarantees only a partial and limited reimbursement.

2. Measure the European threshold. In the scenario envisaged by the reform, check whether the employment relationship has reached at least 22 uninterrupted weeks: this is the requirement indicated to claim the allowance in the country of the last job.

3. Assess the obligations of the competent state. If the competent authority were Swiss, the employee residing abroad would have to comply with the conditions of Swiss legislation and the employment rules. The source also indicates the RAVs' checks on availability for work and job search.

4. Follow the political process. The National Council approved the motion on 17 September; the request is addressed to the Federal Council to exclude the transposition of the new regulations from the AFMP.

These checks do not allow the reform to be automatically treated as a Swiss benefit that is already available. The source describes a revision approved by the Council of the European Union and, on the Swiss side, a motion calling for it not to be included in the AFMP. The distinction serves not to confuse the European rule with the decision on its transposition.

In the case of a Swiss competence outlined by the reform, management would require compliance with local legislation and RAV controls, including checking availability for work and job search. To complete the assessment of your economic impact, use the calcolatore stipendio.

Source: comozero.it