The Plr asks that 40 per cent of the property gains tax stay with the municipalities

Member of parliament Patrick Rusconi has tabled an initiative asking that 40 per cent of the net revenue from the property gains tax go to municipalities. The proposed criterion is location: the share would go to the municipality where the sold property stands, rather than being distributed under a general formula.

The reasoning behind the proposal is that a property's value does not come from the market alone. It also depends on what the municipality has built around it: roads, drainage, schools, services, public transport, green spaces. That value is taxed when the property is sold at a profit, but the revenue goes entirely to the canton. The initiative argues that where value is created, part of the revenue it generates should return.

What it is worth

The figures cited in the text give the measure of the proposal. Applying the 40 per cent share to 2025 data, Ticino's municipalities would receive around 31.6 million francs, while the canton would keep more than 47 million. That is not a marginal amount for municipal budgets, nor one the canton can lose without compensation at a time when cantonal finances leave no room.

The political argument is municipal autonomy. According to the signatories, a stable share of own revenue would let municipalities fund local investment without going through a cantonal subsidy each time, while holding down the tax burden, the lever that remains when income falls short. The initiative frames its request in terms of municipalities facing growing administrative demands, infrastructure needs and rising social spending.

The fact remains that the property gains tax is by nature irregular: it depends on the number and value of property transactions, which vary from year to year and cluster in municipalities where the market is more active. A location-based share would therefore favour the municipalities of the Luganese and the Mendrisiotto more than those in the valleys, where sales are rare and profit margins low. That is the objection the initiative will have to meet in committee, alongside the question of how the canton intends to cover the 31.6 million it would stop collecting.