Bureaucratic burden on Swiss companies: 67% consider it high

Context

TL;DR

• 67% consider the administrative burden high
• 64% report an increase over five years
• Three in ten companies postpone, reduce or cancel investments
• More than 36’000 federal obligations burden companies

Key facts

• Research → gfs.bern on behalf of economiesuisse
• Sample → 1’527 companies surveyed
• Administrative burden → 67% consider it high
• Increase → 64% over the last five years
• Federal obligations → over 36’000

According to the national survey conducted by gfs.bern on behalf of economiesuisse and published today, 67% of the 1’527 companies surveyed consider the administrative burden high, as reported by Keystone-ATS.

In the same sample, 64% report an increase in bureaucracy over the last five years. Businesses complain about complex procedures and duplicate requests from the authorities. The research thus places side by side an assessment of the current burden and an assessment of the increase perceived over time.

The difference between 67% and 64% is three percentage points, but the two values are not interchangeable. The first indicates how many companies consider the burden high; the second indicates how many have observed growth over the five-year period specified by the source. Reading them separately makes it possible to avoid turning the comparison into a single measure of bureaucracy.

The pressure measured on activities

The effects indicated include investment decisions: three out of ten Swiss companies have to postpone, scale back or cancel investments as a result of administrative constraints. The same constraints weigh particularly on the development of new products and services and on the training of apprentices. The source therefore establishes a link between administrative burdens, investment and internal training pathways, but does not offer any further breakdown of the sample. The issue thus affects both development and training activities and the management of procedures.

During a joint press conference, Silvan Wildhaber, president of economiesuisse, described the growing burden as “a problem made at home” that must be corrected to preserve jobs and prosperity, according to the written version of his speech. The news report presents this position together with the research findings: the survey describes the companies’ assessments, while the president identifies correcting the burden as an objective for the economy.

Operational details

Comparison between perception and impact

Three measures that should not be conflated

In the available text, the three results are not interchangeable. The sample is the same, consisting of 1’527 companies, but each figure answers a different question: the level of the burden, the trend in bureaucracy, and investment decisions. The correct comparison starts from this distinction.

The gap between 67% and 64% is therefore three percentage points. It does not, however, justify adding the percentages together or treating them as a single measure. The 67% describes the share that considers the burden high; the 64% the share that reports an increase over the last five years. The first figure concerns the level, the second the perceived change.

The figure of three in ten companies concerns a third dimension: it does not measure a perception, but a decision that companies say they are forced to make because of administrative constraints. The source does not indicate how many of these companies are also part of the 67% or 64%. It is therefore not possible to infer an overlap between the groups from the numbers alone.

The survey is national, but the available text does not break down the results by economic sector or geographic area. The figure should therefore be read as the result for the sample as a whole, not as a ranking among sectors or areas.

The link between problems and requests, by contrast, is explicit. Complex procedures and duplicate requests are associated with the complete digitization of administrative processes, standardized forms and one-stop shops at all levels of government. The principle of submitting data only once is also linked to the problem of duplication. This comparison describes a correspondence between the issues identified and the solutions requested by the business community; it does not yet document an outcome that has already been achieved.

Key points

Requests from the associations

Voices from the various economic sectors

Concerns affect several sectors. Annette Luther, president of scienceindustries, emphasized the need to accelerate approval procedures for chemical and pharmaceutical innovation. In the technology sector, Martin Hirzel, president of Swissmem, pointed to narrower margins and rising regulatory costs. Stefan Mäder, president of the Swiss Insurance Association, believes that the competitiveness of the economic hub should be an explicit objective of regulations.

The three statements point to distinct pressure points. In the chemical and pharmaceutical sector, the focus is on the speed of approvals; in the technology sector, the issue is associated with margins and regulatory costs; for insurance, the topic concerns the objective assigned to regulation. The source does not present these positions as separate survey data, but as concerns expressed by the leaders of different economic sectors.

From managing forms to rules

The business community proposes fully digitizing administrative procedures, supplemented by standardized forms and a single point of access for each level of public administration. The measures would thus affect both the management of procedures and relations with the authorities. The associations are also calling for a reduction in regulation—the federal obligations imposed on companies exceed 36’000—and for the single-submission principle for data to be applied.

The broader economic framework also forms part of the requests: there are calls to eliminate technical barriers to trade, support agreements such as Bilateral III, and adopt a risk-oriented regulatory approach rather than one based on detailed prescription. The text thus places measures concerning administrative processes alongside proposals relating to regulation, trade and international relations.

The source documents requests from the associations and statements by their representatives, not the adoption of a measure already in force. It does not provide a timetable for digitizing, standardizing the forms, or reducing the obligations. The verifiable fact is therefore the importance attributed by companies to bureaucracy and the package of measures that the business community proposes to reduce it.

Source: swissinfo.ch