(there’s a fr and it version too, it’s linked at the bottom of this page).
It mentions overall principles of taxation, fairness, mentions that technically there’s an imputed rent for yachts or cars (but the law only targeted real estate), etc.
I heard that contrary to the EmW and renovation costs who will disappear right away, the interest costs deduction will be progressively reduced over 10 years for first-time home owners. Is that correct? If yes, how does that work:
does it apply to first-time buyers after the law starts (2028?) or any first-time buyer starting some years before?
is the 10-year decreasing period counted from the buy event or from the law starting?
idk about that. I mean, I understand what you are saying - I think its called „Nettobesteuerung“.
But according to the document mentioned by @nabalzbhf imputed rental income was not mainly about income.
In contrary dividends are clearly income, thats why the costs to generate this income can be deducted.
Anyway, I am not a expert in this field and to me it is like a chicken or egg question. Doesnt matter to me what was first, but it males sense both exist.
I was just thinking about this removal. I wonder if they thought at all cases where they use the tax declaration income to provide benefits; for example the childcare tariff. If you are in a lower tax bracket, you will pay less for child care in certain cantons.
Now, imagine the situation: somebody inherited a almost paid for home, has a 80k income, a child in the Kita. And the second case lives in a rented apartment, has 80k income, again a child in the Kita.
The two situations are not identical; the second family needs to pay for rent and therefore needs the help with reduced rate more than the first family. Before the vote, the first family would see their income go up to 90k or something (imputed value minus deductions) and therefore pay more for the Kita.
After the vote, if they don’t change the system to determine tariff, subsidies like this will be distorted and distributed less fairly. What do you think?
I was overhearing colleagues talk today (the “perk” of RTO policies and open spaces), and one was talking about how they had given up on their plan to buy a “cheap” house to renovate after the vote. Their argument was that in VD, renovations have essentially increased by 50% in price, and it would be very difficult to find available workers in the next couple of years.
I wonder how the price of those houses will evolve. We’re talking about a substantial price decrease necessary to counter balance the increase in renovation costs. Probably enough that people would prefer to sit out for a while rather than eat a 6 figure “loss”. At the same time, they’re probably mostly owned by older people right now, and will end up in inheritance, which might push people towards selling anyway.
In Zurich City the Vermögen is being taken into account when calculating Kita prices. However the houseowner’s Vermögen only goes up 400k when he earns a 1M house meanwhile someone who inherits 1M ….
The tax values of homes are being reassessed, though, especially in ZH, if I remember correctly. So, the difference between tax value and market value may decrease in the near future.
If I remember correctly, that reassessment was postponed after the results of the vote on Eigenmietwert. Stocker/SVP are keenly aware whose interests they represent.
I’ve scanned this full thread, but it’s not clear to me when the Eigenmietwert and renovation deductions removal will enter into force. Above it is indicated immediately, but does this mean tax year 2026, or 2025 already? Cantonal interpretations yet to be defined?
Do I have time to scramble some renovations before end 2025 to still benefit from the tax offset on renovation cost?
The reality is renovation of residences is a constant and huge part of our circle economy, so if the federation doesn’t bring back officially the tax offset for renovations there will be a huge increase for work done without an invoice or partial invoice where the only loser will be the federation which will not be able to recoup VAT and other state taxes connected with companies and their operations. I would be that even with the tax offset for renovation the state is net positive by giving back a tax offset but taking VAT and other taxes on the other side. Companies will find work, people will find their way to obtain a discount, the state won’t be able to cash in on these works.
People who buy old and renovate are usually people who are resourceful and find their way, so I expect there will be no change in the availabilities for older properties in the years to come. Might be even more expensive in the end as it will be more complicated and that will push prices up for new and old properties. People still need to live somewhere and as long we have more people coming here and we are not building enough, difficult to have a drastic change.
Mit dem Lesen und der Teilnahme an diesem Forum bestätigst du, dass du die Forum-Richtlinien gelesen hast und damit einverstanden bist sowie den Haftungsausschluss auf http://www.mustachianpost.com/de/ akzeptierst.
