Dispute over revenue from the auctioning of tariff quotas
Published: Wednesday, Mar 6th 2024, 11:50
Updated At: Wednesday, Mar 6th 2024, 11:51
Volver a Live Feed
On Wednesday, the National Council began detailed deliberations on the Customs Act. It decided that revenue from the auctioning of tariff quotas, such as for meat, should be considered import duties in future.
The decision means that the funds will no longer benefit the general federal treasury in future. Instead, they are refundable under certain circumstances - namely when products are re-exported after further processing.
The SP, Greens and GLP opposed the new regulation. However, they were defeated by 73 votes to 117 and 4 abstentions. Up to 200 million francs a year are at stake, said SP Co-President Cédric Wermuth (AG). It would not be the farmers who would benefit, but the large food processors.
"Well-represented circles"
Kathrin Bertschy (GLP/BE) identified the influence of "well-represented circles" in parliament behind the proposal. The rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO) did not allow such revenue to be defined as an import tax. It would be a hidden export subsidy.
Markus Ritter (center/SG) contradicted this assessment on behalf of the majority of the National Council's Committee for Economic Affairs and Taxation (WAK-N). According to Ritter, the figure of CHF 200 million mentioned by Wermuth and in an article in the Tamedia newspapers on Wednesday was also a hoax. This is because it concerns revenue from the import of meat, most of which is not re-exported.
Finance Minister Karin Keller-Sutter, on the other hand, supported the proposal of the Commission minority led by Wermuth, citing the financial situation of the Confederation.
Controversial purpose article
In the first block of the debate, which lasted several hours, the article on the purpose of the law also gave rise to discussion. An SVP minority in the pre-advisory committee wanted to explicitly state that the Federal Office for Customs and Border Security (BAZG) should also contribute to combating illegal migration. However, it did not find a majority for this.
The Federal Council had originally made the same proposal. However, Keller-Sutter refrained from submitting a corresponding proposal, citing resistance from the cantons. There was no difference in substance. Border guards could also carry out checks on people at any time as part of checks on goods.
"Checking people at the border is a police competence," stated Jacqueline Badran (SP/ZH) on behalf of her parliamentary group. The cantons had made it clear that they did not want to relinquish this competence.
In addition, the SVP unsuccessfully requested that the control of cross-border passenger traffic be explicitly mentioned in the list of tasks of the BAZG.
Opponents criticized this as irrelevant. If comprehensive identity checks were to be introduced, this would have to be done elsewhere, said Center Party spokesperson Leo Müller (LU).
"Poorly prepared"
Marionna Schlatter (Greens/ZH) accused the SVP of wanting to turn customs into a migration police force. Schlatter reiterated her party's fundamental criticism of the bill. The customs law was unfinished - and parliament had been presented with a fait accompli by merging customs and border protection.
The Zurich Green National Councillor was not alone in her criticism. Ritter, as spokesperson for the committee, also described the law as poorly prepared: "We've had two years and still don't understand it."
©Keystone/SDA
Spanish 
English 
German 
French 
Arabic