With motion 22.3008, Parliament wants to amend the Federal Act on Swiss Federal Railways (SBBG) and grant SBB financial aid of CHF 1.2 billion to compensate for pandemic-related revenue shortfalls in long-distance transport and to relieve the financial burden on long-distance transport with a reduction in train path prices of CHF 1.7 billion. Here is a first critical look.
This is what it’s all about:
- VAP rejects capital subsidy of a total of 3 billion francs to SBB – entrepreneurial responsibility is needed
- Maintaining the SBB monopoly in long-distance traffic is problematic from a European policy point of view – an orderly migration strategy is needed to open up the market.
- The amendment of the law should demand more entrepreneurial responsibility and provide for monitoring of SBB in long-distance traffic.
- LSVA must not be misused for reserves in the BIF
Motion 22.3008 “Support for the implementation of SBB investments and a long-term vision in Covid 19 times” calls for a draft law according to which SBB’s deficits caused by the Covid 19 pandemic would be considered extraordinary and SBB would be granted corresponding financial aid. This should enable the investments to be carried out as planned in accordance with the decisions of the Federal Assembly.
Initial situation
The politically approved extensions to the railway infrastructure will lead to an expansion of services. This requires investments in rolling stock. The expansion of services – at least in the initial phase – is recording deficits in long-distance and regional transport; the latter is financed by the corresponding credit decisions in regional passenger transport (RPV) by the federal government and the cantons.
During the pandemic, long-distance transport suffered large deficits which, unlike RPV, were not financed. Instead, the Federal Council took the view that it was in the entrepreneurial risk area of profitable long-distance transport to bear the consequences of the pandemic.
Investments by the SBB in investment properties near stations require large sums of money, but overall they increase the attractiveness of the rail passenger service. This ignores the fact that rail freight traffic suffers at locations in conurbation centres; where investment properties are built, logistics locations disappear (Zurich Justice Centre, Europa-Allee Zurich, etc.). SBB Real Estate benefited from a generous opening balance sheet and generates substantial profits. These are used for the pension fund (PF), which regularly attracts media attention with the highest conversion rates.
Proposal of the Federal Council
The Federal Council proposes a one-off capital contribution of CHF 1.25 billion (losses in long-distance traffic from 2020 to 2022). This means that SBB does not have to make any entrepreneurial contribution, just as it does in the RPV.
The Federal Council also proposes the waiver of contribution margins in the years 2023 to 2029 amounting to 1.7 billion francs in order to raise profitability in long-distance traffic to an appropriate level (4 to 8% return on sales). These must be compensated for as missing revenues in infrastructure by additional operating contributions to SBB Infrastructure from the Rail Infrastructure Fund (BIF). According to the Federal Council, the liquidity in the BIF is sufficient for this.
Furthermore, the financing instruments are to be corrected. The previous granting of vault loans, which led to SBB’s indebtedness outside the debt brake, is to be replaced in future by loans via the federal budget. This means that parliament will now decide on loans, and at the same time the debt brake will apply. The change is to take effect from a debt level to be defined, as of the end of 2023: CHF 11.7 billion. Expansion steps that lead to unprofitable service expansions will therefore be subject to the debt brake. After the capital injection of CHF 1.25 billion, vault loans can continue to be granted until the threshold of CHF 11.7 billion is exceeded again.
The liquidity of the BIF is to be additionally ensured. To this end, the Federal Council proposes that two-thirds of the HVF be placed in the BIF. The federal share of the HVF should only be used to offset the uncovered costs from road transport once a reserve of CHF 300 million has been shown.
Our assessment
We reject a capital subsidy, as this would mean that SBB would not have to make any entrepreneurial contribution to the consequences of the pandemic in its own economic and monopolised long-distance traffic. At the very least, monitoring of SBB’s entrepreneurial activities in long-distance traffic should be introduced to accompany the capital subsidy.
The correction of the financing instruments is necessary. Since the state-owned enterprise has a de facto state guarantee, vault loans should no longer be possible in future. Instead, parliament should decide on loans in compliance with the debt brake and in awareness of this state guarantee. We therefore reject the reservation of the debt ceiling of CHF 11.7 billion with the option of further vault loans. Unless the upper limit is noticeably reduced again.
Ensuring the liquidity of the BIF is unnecessary in view of sufficient reserves. By waiving contribution margins, the Confederation is reducing the entrepreneurial pressure on SBB. At the same time, it maintains SBB’s monopoly in long-distance transport. This is highly problematic in terms of European policy, as the EU has liberalised long-distance transport and expects Switzerland to adopt this liberalisation step. We therefore demand a migration strategy from the Federal Council for the opening of the market in Switzerland and, in parallel, monitoring of the entrepreneurial activities of the SBB in long-distance traffic.
We also reject the misuse of the HVF to ensure the reserve of the BIF. The HVF is intended to compensate for the environmental costs of road transport and to contribute to a more climate-friendly choice of transport mode. As an incentive tax, it is not levied for infrastructure expansion and maintenance.
-and maintenance of infrastructure, from which passenger transport essentially benefits. On the contrary, the HVF should be earmarked for rail freight transport and for measures for the climate-friendly development of road transport.
Alternatives such as adjustments to the offer, foregoing investments or selling assets are mentioned in the consultation documents but rejected. We do not agree with this assessment. Non-operational assets such as Gateway Basel Nord and other combined transport transhipment companies, all of which must be available on a non-discriminatory basis in accordance with Art. 8 GüTG, could be sold. Sales of SBB’s other real estate portfolio would also be possible without operational restrictions. Reductions in services in the off-peak hours would also contribute to easing the construction site situation at night.
