Two-thirds of Swiss firms say administrative burden is high

Two-thirds of Swiss companies rate their administrative burden as high, according to a nationwide survey published on Monday, November 9. The Bureaucracy Monitor found that 67% of respondents considered the burden fairly or very high, while 29% rated it low.

The research institute gfs.bern conducted the study for business federation economiesuisse. It surveyed 1,527 companies across Switzerland between the end of June and the beginning of August. The findings also point to a growing pressure: 64% of companies said their burden had increased over the past five years. Only 5% said it had fallen.

The results put paperwork and compliance firmly on the business agenda. Two-thirds of the firms also said administrative tasks take too much of their staff’s time. Social security, VAT and accounting stood out as areas where companies encounter bureaucracy. The figures capture a broad concern across Swiss firms, from the time spent on administrative work to the projects companies say it can disrupt.

Around 30% of companies said bureaucracy had already delayed, reduced or killed projects. Among firms that changed plans, 41% cited the development of new products or services and 39% said investment was affected. Planned staff expansion was put on hold by 23%, while 19% cited apprentice training.

The figures show that administrative demands reach beyond routine paperwork into decisions about growth and business development. Product launches, investment, hiring and training all appeared among the plans affected. Swissmem president Martin Hirzel warned that money tied up in bureaucracy was unavailable for future investment, as companies faced pressure from falling profit margins.

The survey findings give a measurable dimension to that concern: firms reported changes to projects across several areas of activity. The percentages describe the types of plans affected among companies that had adjusted projects, and the responses indicate that the consequences can touch both immediate expansion and longer-term work such as developing services or training apprentices.

The burden is reported more often by larger firms, though smaller companies also feel the effects. Among businesses with more than 250 employees, 45% said they had postponed or adjusted projects because of bureaucracy. For firms with fewer than ten employees, the share was 20%.

The survey also found that two-thirds of companies believe administrative tasks take too much staff time. Social security, VAT and accounting were identified as particularly bureaucratic areas. These demands sit alongside the other project impacts recorded in the study, including changes to investment, product development, hiring and apprentice training.

The contrast by company size shows that the experience is not uniform. Nearly half of the largest firms surveyed reported projects affected, compared with one in five of the smallest. Yet the smaller-firm figure still signals that project changes linked to bureaucracy are not confined to the country’s biggest employers. Across the respondents, time spent on administration emerged as a wider workplace concern.

Economiesuisse and other business associations want simpler rules, faster authorisations and more digital administration. The survey also points to practical changes companies would welcome: simplifying existing regulations, standardising forms and coordinating administrative procedures more effectively.

Economiesuisse president Silvan Wildhaber called the rising burden and associated bureaucracy “home-grown” and said urgent action was needed. Swissmem president Martin Hirzel linked the administrative costs to investment, saying funds absorbed by bureaucracy could not be used for future investment. Companies are already under pressure from falling profit margins, the report said.

The findings also show that many firms see a public purpose in some administrative requirements. 44% considered the burden at least partly socially justified, and 24% regarded it as mostly or entirely justified. That leaves the debate focused on how rules are applied and administered, alongside calls from business groups for simplification, quicker procedures and better digital services.