The proposal to impose a multi-thousand-franc fee on foreign nationals is making its way through the Swiss Parliament. An expert tells The Local what the next steps could be and what the chances of implementating these measures are.
The idea of an immigration tax was first proposed in October 2023 by the right-leaning Swiss economist Reiner Eichenberger, who argued that foreign nationals should pay for the “privilege of living in Switzerland and taking advantage of its excellent infrastructure.”
It soon resonated on the legislative level, when MP Andrea Caroni from the Swiss People’s Party (SVP) filed a motion in the Parliament seeking to impose an ‘entry fee’ on immigrants.
A similar measure was then proposed again in 2025 by deputy Simon Michel from the Liberal-Radical Party (FDP).
But the controversial proposal moved a step closer in September this year when lawmakers in Switzerland approved the idea of imposing a 4,000 franc tax on EU nationals who settle in the country.
Adult family members who arrive in Switzerland under family reunification rules would be subject to a levy of at least 2,000 francs.
The Federal Council has said the revenue from the tax would be “redistributed to the population and the economy.”
READ MORE: Will Switzerland bring in an immigration tax on foreigners?
Why is this proposal gaining momentum now?
To get some clarity, The Local put this question to René Schwok, an expert in European and International Security Studies at the University of Geneva.
According to him, it comes down to a “fear that more EU nationals will come to settle in Switzerland.”
However, if the immigration tax is actually levied, it would be applicable to all immigrants, he said.
The main point, however, is that, under the current plan, this fee is “not a permanent tax applicable to every European national who comes to work or settle in Switzerland.”
Instead, it would go into effect “only after the Federal Council activates the safeguard clause” within the future package of agreements between Switzerland and the European Union – the Bilaterals III.
As a reminder, this clause allows temporary restrictions on the free movement agreement when specific thresholds related to net immigration, unemployment or social assistance are exceeded.
It basically ensures that migration remains employment and need-focused.
Therefore, if the clause is not activated, no EU worker or adult family members would be subject to this tax, Schwok said.
Is this plan set in stone?
No.
At this time, the future of this proposal is still up in the air, with everyone involved agreeing on one point: that actual implementation will face numerous legal and other obstacles.
Firstly, the National Council – the lower chamber of parliament, still has to weigh in on this issue, most likely in the winter session of the Parliament, in December.
But even assuming that the two chambers approve the proposal, the matter will not end there.
Though Schwok said he “hasn’t yet seen any reactions to the tax proposal from members of the European Parliament, if this tax is introduced, the Bilateral Agreements III stipulate that the EU must bring the matter before the Joint Committee.”
“If no agreement is reached at the Joint Committee level, the matter must be brought before the new Joint Arbitration Tribunal. If the Arbitration Tribunal rules in Switzerland’s favour, the Federal Council may implement the measure, but the EU may take proportionate retaliatory measures, likely only by imposing an identical tax on Swiss nationals settling in the EU.”
On the other hand, “if the Arbitration Tribunal does not rule in Switzerland’s favour, then the EU may take retaliatory measures under any of the eight agreements contained in the Bilateral Agreements III – except for agriculture – and not just in the area of the free movement of persons.”
READ MORE: How will Switzerland benefit from new pact with the European Union?
If implemented, would fewer foreigners immigrate to Switzerland?
This too remains to be seen.
While there’s no evidence at this time of the drop in migration, “obviously – and this goes without saying – the tax would affect the poorest [immigrants] more than the richest,” Schwok said.
