Germany tries to convince Swiss banks to play by its rules

Germany and Switzerland signed a treaty today in which Switzerland agreed to impose taxes on Germans' secret accounts in Swiss banks, but the deal still falls short of the transparency Germany wants. 

Pascal Lauener/Reuters
Swiss Secretary of State in the finance department Michael Ambuehl (r.) and Peter Gottwald, Germany's ambassador to Switzerland shake hands before exchanging the signed agreement on a deal on taxing secret offshore accounts between Switzerland and Germany in Bern, Switzerland, April 5.

Banking secrecy is one of Switzerland’s most coveted products, along with wristwatches and Toblerone chocolate. Swiss banks manage $2.1 trillion in foreign money, and the financial sector generates about 10 percent of Swiss GDP, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

But a global crackdown on tax evasion, initiated by the OECD in 2009, has led to numerous information-exchange deals with tax havens like Luxembourg, Monaco, and the Cayman Islands. Ever since, Switzerland has tried to walk a fine line between concessions to the international desire for financial transparency and keeping the locational advantage of its banking secrecy.

“Swiss society is split over the banking secret,” says Ulrich Thielemann, who taught economic ethics at St. Gallen University in Switzerland before setting up a think tank in Berlin. “But even those who want to limit it do so out of economic consideration. There is no sense of guilt.”

Germany and Switzerland signed a treaty today on taxing Germans' secret accounts with Swiss banks. The German Finance ministry hopes the agreement will allow them to retrieve billions of euros in revenue that tax evaders have parked in Swiss offshore accounts. But the deal could still fail because German opposition parties – that consider it too lenient – might block it in parliament.

For years, Germany has pressed Switzerland to agree to a deal in which Swiss authorities would impose taxes on Germans’ accounts, charge fees on undeclared money, and pass the proceeds on to Germany. The Finance ministry in Berlin estimates that up to €150 million ($196 million) in German funds are stowed away in Swiss accounts. The US and Switzerland signed a similar treaty after massive pressure by US government agencies on Swiss banks. 

But while the US got access to personal data of Americans with Swiss accounts, the deal with Germany does not go so far: the identities of German customers would still be withheld, making a prosecution by German agencies impossible. For the political opposition in Germany, this is equivalent to protecting criminals.

“This is a slap into the faces of honest German taxpayers," Sigmar Gabriel, leader of the Social Democrats, told journalists today. “The complicity of Swiss banks in crimes committed by German citizens needs to be tackled systematically.”

Mr. Gabriel said his party would block the ratification of the deal in parliament. The government needs the votes of the opposition on this issue. 

The agreement has been overshadowed by a diplomatic row over arrest warrants issued by Swiss authorities against three German tax inspectors. On April 2, Swiss and German media reported that the Swiss federal prosecutor had issued arrest warrants for the three Germans, who in 2010 bought a CD from an informant containing personal data of Germans with accounts in Swiss banking giant Credit Suisse. The Swiss accusation of “industrial espionage” caused an outcry in Germany – “a scandal without comparison,” said Jürgen Trittin, chief whip of the Green party.

Swiss politicians upped the ante. Toni Brunner, leader of the conservative Swiss People’s Party, called Germany’s defense of its tax inspectors “a declaration of war.”

While German Chancellor Angela Merkel asked for moderation in the debate, observers see the arrest warrants as bargaining chips in the tax deal. “The treaty grants freedom from prosecution for tax inspectors who may have broken Swiss law,” says Thomas Eigenthaler, head of the German Tax Union (DTSG), which represents civil servants working for the tax authorities. “It is no coincidence that the arrest warrants were issued at exactly this point in time. All this happens to keep the Swiss banking secret intact for a little longer.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.