September 28 vote: Swiss set to back e-ID but undecided on cantonal property tax 

The referendum on September 28 is approaching. The outcome regarding the abolition of rental value looks set to be close. Keystone / Salvatore Di Nolfi

Two weeks before the vote on an electronic identity (e-ID) and the abolition of the imputed rental value system, the second SBC survey shows that the former is likely to be approved, while the latter could go either way. 

Most Swiss Abroad can breathe a sigh of relief: e-ID seems to be a done deal. “We assume a high probability of acceptance,” says pollster Lukas Golder from gfs.bern, which conducted the survey on behalf of the Swiss Broadcasting Corporation (SBC), Swissinfo’s parent company. 

The introduction of e-ID is a long-standing concern of the Organisation of the Swiss Abroad, which hopes that it will make it easier to deal with the Swiss authorities and possibly also carry out bank transactions. 

This made the relative reluctance of the Swiss Abroad to back the proposed legislation in the first poll all the more surprising. This has since changed: approval has risen from 52% to 60%. 

The reasons for the increased support remain speculative. However, the issue is being discussed in Facebook groups, and members of the Council of the Swiss Abroad are loudly drawing attention to the vote. 

This means that the Swiss diaspora is also slightly more in favour of the e-ID than the electorate as a whole. 

Overall, approval is also at 59%. The pollsters speak of a solid approval rating. 

E-ID ‘a question of trust’ 

The formation of opinion on the e-ID proposal between the first and second surveys shows clear patterns. Criticism of e-ID has grown significantly among the rural population. It has also increased among those voters who are mistrustful of the institutions as well as among voters close to the right-wing Swiss People’s Party and those who are not affiliated with a political party. 

Pilot project for a driving licence based on e-ID. Keystone / Cyril Zingaro

“Ultimately, it’s a question of trust in the institutions,” Golder says. “Those who have little mistrust are very likely to vote in favour.” 

In addition, men are clearly in favour of this government bill, while women are more critical. This corresponds to a familiar pattern in political research, which can be seen time and again with proposals concerning the army, environmental policy or technology. 

The survey

For the second survey on the federal votes on September 28, 2025, the gfs.bern institute interviewed 14,461 voters between September 3-11. The statistical margin of error is +/-2.8 percentage points. 

Finally, it’s striking that the issue of e-ID is characterised by just two strong arguments that dominate everything. The strongest yes argument is: “E-ID is important so that Switzerland can keep pace with digitalisation.”

The strongest no argument is: “E-ID is not secure and doesn’t protect privacy sufficiently.” However, the debate has so far been “relatively weak”, as an analysis of media coverage has shown, Golder says. 

Owner-occupied rental value loses approval 

The situation regarding the “cantonal property tax” proposal, now better known as the “abolition of the imputed rental value”, is much less clear than with e-ID.  

The approval seen during the first poll has come under pressure. Cumulatively – “clearly in favour” plus “somewhat in favour” – it is still 51%. This is seven percentage points lower than in the first poll in August. Among the Swiss Abroad, approval is lower, at 49%. 

“Rejection has risen, while approval has fallen at the same time,” says gfs political scientist Martina Mousson. “That’s why we’re talking about a no trend, even if the majority remains in favour.” 

However, this doesn’t mean that gfs expects the vote to fail. This is because the arguments in favour are still more convincing. “We’re seeing more support for the pro arguments and also a stronger impact of these arguments,” Mousson explains. That speaks in favour of a yes vote, she says. “That’s why we have to leave it open.” 

At the same time, all arguments in favour have lost support since August and all arguments against have gained. Shortly before the final push, the opponents’ campaign has already taken effect. 

Tenants versus homeowners 

The opponents’ strongest argument is: “The abolition of the imputed rental value primarily relieves the burden on the rich.” The pro argument that scored the highest among respondents was: “Home ownership will become more affordable.” 

The fact that these two arguments are at the top of the list fits in with another finding of the pollsters: the primary line of conflict in this proposal is between renters and homeowners. At 62% each, both are clearly against and clearly in favour respectively. 

Politically, the poles lie in the corresponding left-right scheme with the Greens on the left, whose voters are most united against the system change, and People’s Party voters on the right, who are most united in favour. 

There is also a clear linguistic divide: French-speaking Switzerland is against the proposal, while German-speaking Switzerland is in favour.  

Even if the survey data from gfs.bern is not ideal for analysing the 26 cantons, the latest figures show a narrow cantonal majority in favour. Five cantons, mainly in French-speaking Switzerland, are leaning towards no, 15 are leaning towards yes and six are undecided. “It could be enough for a majority of the cantons,” the researchers conclude. 

The complexity of the issue may lead to “erroneous votes”. Keystone / Martial Trezzini

‘Wrong votes’

Martina Mousson says the complexity of the bill makes it difficult to make accurate predictions. Her colleague Lukas Golder also assumes that some voters could misunderstand the bill – for example, because the ballot papers do not explicitly mention the “abolition of the imputed rental value” or because the “introduction of a tax” could be favoured, even if a tax is abolished first. 

Researchers refer to such confusing proposals as “wrong votes”. These are votes that voters put in the ballot box out of a misunderstanding and contrary to their own values. According to Golder, there are examples of ballots with a wrong vote percentage of 20%. However, he doesn’t see this as a democratic problem. “The wrong votes from both camps can cancel each other out.” 

Edited by Samuel Jaberg. Translated from German by DeepL/ts