Same income, different taxes: savings of up to 90%

Context

TL;DR

• With the same income, the municipality changes the tax bill.
• One case reaches over 90% in savings.
• The most advantageous municipality depends on income and family.

Key facts

• Source → Tages-Anzeiger analysis based on data from the Federal Tax Administration
• Comparison → 20 types of households and 27 income brackets
• Case → family with two children and 150mila gross francs
• Les Verrières → 13,57% in taxes
• Baar → 1,34% in taxes
• Difference → 18'351 francs per year
• High income → approximately 164'500 francs in Freienbach and Wollerau
• Vaud comparison → 363'500 francs in Château-d'Oex and several Vaud municipalities

Considering a family with two children and a total gross income of 150mila francs, in Baar, in the Canton of Zug, taxes amount to 1,34%, compared with 13,57% in Les Verrières, in the Canton of Neuchâtel. The difference reaches 18'351 francs per year and, in the case examined, the saving exceeds 90%.

An analysis by the Zurich daily Tages-Anzeiger, based on data from the Federal Tax Administration, compared the tax burden of Swiss municipalities for 20 different types of households and 27 income brackets. The data show that there is no single tax haven: the most advantageous municipality varies according to income and family composition.

A ranking that changes

For a household with two children and an income of one million francs, approximately 164'500 francs in taxes are paid in Freienbach and Wollerau; in Château-d'Oex and several other Vaud municipalities, the amount rises to 363'500. The difference approaches 200mila francs.

The Canton of Zug remains favorable also for the middle class: a family with two children and two salaries pays no income tax on total earnings up to 100mila francs.

The picture varies from one canton to another. Geneva is relatively affordable for the lower-middle income bracket, but proves more costly for high incomes. Appenzell Innerrhoden, on the other hand, is more favorable to affluent taxpayers, while in Bern the tax burden remains high for almost all income categories.

The comparison covers municipal, cantonal and federal income taxes. Wealth taxes, church taxes and other fees are excluded; moreover, the effective tax burden may vary depending on individual deductions. For this reason, the ranking describes comparable tax profiles, not an identical answer for every taxpayer.

The key point remains residence: with the same income, the municipality can significantly change the bill. But as soon as income or family structure changes, the location at the top of the comparison changes too.

Operational details

Tax savings are not the total cost

Rent can change the outcome

Tax data, considered on its own, is not enough to decide where to live. The same analysis warns that rents can erase the advantage gained on the tax bill, especially for households with low incomes. In municipalities that are more tax-efficient, rents in fact tend to be high; localities with a higher tax burden may prove less expensive overall when housing costs are lower.

The practical comparison must therefore combine two perspectives, without turning the tax ranking into an absolute ranking:

This logic avoids taking the result referring to a family with two children and applying it to any household. The analysis considered 20 types and the result shows that the number of children, family composition, and income shift the outcome. A municipality that appears highly competitive in one bracket may not be so in another.

The word taxes must also be read precisely. The comparison includes income taxes at the municipal, cantonal, and federal levels, but not wealth, church, and other taxes. A difference shown in the ranking therefore does not cover every item that may affect a family's finances. Individual deductions can also change the effective burden.

For those considering moving to a different municipality, the question is not only how much the tax bill decreases, but whether the new housing cost really results in savings. For low incomes, the second figure may weigh more than the first; for high incomes, the tax comparison may be broader, but it remains tied to the family profile and the bracket considered. Affordability should be understood as a balance between these items, not as a permanent label for the municipality.

Key points

From comparison to personal verification

To use the comparison correctly, it is advisable to turn the data into a structured verification. The process does not start with the Municipality that appears at the top, but with the household profile and the income to be compared.

Five steps for a consistent verification

1. Set the reference income. Use the total gross income indicated for the family and place the case in the relevant bracket. The analysis is based on 27 brackets, so a result should not automatically be moved from one bracket to another. 2. Define the family. Indicate the number of children and the composition of the household; if there are two salaries, the data must be retained in the profile, because the map changes with the family structure. 3. Compare Municipalities and do not stop at the Canton. The source’s results are municipal, and the most favorable locality changes depending on the profile examined. 4. Consider housing costs alongside taxation. Put the rent of the locality being considered next to the tax difference. For a low-income household, this item may weigh more than taxes and may cancel out the savings. 5. Check the scope. Verify that the calculation covers municipal, cantonal and federal income taxes, and remember that wealth taxes, church taxes, other fees and individual deductions remain separate factors.

The final result should be read in two stages. First, identify the Municipality that is most tax-favorable for your profile; then check whether housing costs change the overall balance. If the income or family composition changes, the comparison must be repeated: the source shows that the most advantageous locality is not fixed.

The same method prevents confusing a comparison between taxes with a promise of automatic savings. The Municipality’s data must be considered together with the family, the income bracket and the items excluded from the analysis. Personal verification must therefore keep the tax calculation and the housing calculation separate, so as not to attribute to the former savings that the latter may reduce.

For a first personal estimate, use calcolatore stipendio/imposte.

Source: tio.ch