[ad_1]
In the summer, parliament ordered the Federal Council to draft a rent reduction law for the closure. The National Council voted against it on Monday. Now there is the risk of expensive late payments, food entrepreneur Michel Péclard fears.
Restaurant entrepreneur Michel Péclard does not understand why the National Council no longer wants to hear about a legal rent reduction due to the closure.
Photo: Njazi Nivokazi
Michel Péclard cannot believe it. The Zurich catering entrepreneur, who operates 14 restaurants, including the pump station on the lake, has relied on the National Council for a statutory lease exemption. But nothing threatens to happen: On Monday night, the National Council rejected the commercial rental law with 100 to 87 votes. This means that the project is very likely to fail, because the matter should not find a majority in the Council of States on Wednesday.
“If the law doesn’t come through, now there is the risk of costly additional rental claims for March and April. Since VAT is now also paid, that could be too much for some companies, ”says Péclard.
More than 100,000 companies affected
What worries him in particular: it was the parliament itself that in the summer forced the Federal Council through a motion to draft a law on rent exemption for the closing phase. According to estimates, between 25 and 30 percent of all commercial tenants or more than 100,000 businesses were forced to close between March and June.
“Everyone has been waiting for the legislature,” says Péclard. “I don’t understand why the National Council first demands a rental exemption law and then does not pass it. Now we have lost valuable months ”, he criticizes. You’re still lucky that your pandemic insurance should cover additional rental claims, wait.
Disappointed hopes
“After the Parliament repeatedly gave hope to thousands of commercial tenants who are having difficulty paying their rents due to official closings, things are now going the other way,” criticized the Swiss Tenants Association.
The bourgeois majority justified its rejection by saying that the law would retrospectively intervene in private contractual relationships. Philipp Matthias Bregy (CVP) pointed out that restaurants and other SMEs could soon have help for difficult situations from the federal government and the cantons. Proponents of the law, such as Jacqueline Badran (SP), consider that the legally prescribed lease exemption is necessary to avoid a wave of bankruptcies in the restaurant industry.
Uncompromising owners
“I don’t see why the owners shouldn’t bear a portion of the closing costs. By no means are everyone willing to accept a rental commitment, ”says gastronomic entrepreneur Péclard. According to a survey by the Gastrosuisse Association, 40 percent of establishments have not even negotiated with the owner.
Didier Rochat, Managing Director of the Blaues Kreuz organization, also reports on this. The addiction support organization operates second-hand stores throughout Switzerland. “So far, we have not seen any owner concessions at the Wil and Wattwil locations,” said Rochat. The rent in Wil would only add up to 15,000 francs a month. For Brockenstube in Jona, the landlord offered a 30 percent rent reduction during the closing months. At the same time, the Blue Cross should not have raised new demands in the future. Now you have no choice but to look for the conversation again.
At best, there is still help at the cantonal level. For example, the electorate in Baselland agreed on Sunday to grant SMEs retroactive rent reductions. The canton pays one third of the rent if the owner and tenant agree to reduce the rent by one third. The tenant only has to pay one third, the landlord receives two thirds of the rent.
Of the companies whose cantons do not offer help, some are likely to try their luck with legal action. Gastro Suisse has already announced that it will support its members to go to court. The tenant association also wants to do this and has already started the first procedures.
