President Karin Keller-Sutter and Economics Minister Guy Parmelin travelled to the USA after Easter for the spring meeting of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank in the American capital. This opportunity will also be used for meetings with representatives of the Trump administration. The goal of this mission was clear: to reverse the 10 percent tariffs imposed on Swiss goods and to avert the much higher rates that are threatening.
During their visit, the two Swiss ministers had planned to highlight that Switzerland is one of the largest foreign investors in the USA. They also pointed out that the trade balance is quite balanced when factoring in services trade. But that alone was probably not enough and, in fact, the focus should not solely be on tariffs. The aim was that both countries get back to business in the long run.
Before this meeting, we had compiled various approaches aiming to achieve this goal. It is not about currying favor with a global power. After all, one must keep in mind that other major powers are watching to see what concessions Switzerland is willing to make and the relationship with other countries must not be disrupted because of the USA.
Rather, the goal is to seek long-term sustainable solutions that expand the (economic) freedom of both Americans and Swiss citizens. A lot is currently happening, and this opportunity should be seized. There are ideas that can be implemented quickly and require a little willpower whilst others may spark controversy in Switzerland. So, it’s a matter of addressing both low-hanging fruits and high-hanging fruits, which will take more time.
Low-Hanging Fruits
1) Approval of Medical Products: If a medical product is approved in the EU, it should also be allowed to be marketed in Switzerland. But what about products from the USA? In 2022, the Swiss Parliament instructed the Federal Council to allow products certified by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to be sold in Switzerland. This would enable U.S. companies to offer their products in the Swiss market without the additional burden of EU certification. Moreover, this would improve Switzerland’s security of supply with medical products. In this regard, Switzerland should take decisive action.
2) Reducing Tariffs: This would apply to selected agricultural goods, as Switzerland no longer imposes tariffs on industrial products. While a general tariff reduction would be desirable from a consumer perspective, it is unrealistic due to domestic political reasons. However, tariffs on agricultural products that cannot even be grown in Switzerland make little sense. For instance, there are tariffs on oranges, grapefruits, and macadamia nuts — products that are cultivated in places like California or Florida. This is unnecessary from the perspective of Swiss agriculture, and certainly from the standpoint of Swiss consumers.
3) 3,000 Apprentices Annually: 500 Swiss companies in the USA employ around 500,000 people. These companies could play an even greater cultural role than they do today, particularly in dual education. Companies like the industrial giants Bühler and Dätwyler, as well as Nestlé, Zurich, and various others, are already running apprenticeship programs in the USA. Swiss companies could therefore make a pledge, for example by starting each year with 3,000 apprentices (that would total 9,000 once the program is fully running with a three-year apprenticeship). If a prominent patron is needed, one could ask Johann Schneider-Ammann and Ivanka Trump. The U.S. president’s daughter met with the former Swiss Federal Councillor in 2017 and showed great interest in the Swiss dual education model.
4) Full Mobility for Interns: On October 11, 2024, Switzerland and the USA signed an agreement on the exchange of interns and young professionals. The annual upper limit for Switzerland is set at 300 permits. These are temporary stays (12 to 18 months) for professional training and development. There is an opportunity to grant more flexibility in this area. For example, Swiss authorities could allow unlimited numbers of U.S. interns for temporary training in Switzerland, especially if the apprenticeship program mentioned in point 3 is implemented.
5) Investment Plans of the Pharmaceutical Industry and Other Sectors: So far, the pharmaceutical industry has not been hit with tariffs. To counter this or mitigate future tariffs, the affected companies could quantify their expansion plans in the USA. Novartis has just announced it will invest $23 billion in America over the next five years. It could generally be helpful if large Swiss companies signaled their provisional investment plans to the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO). The Swiss Federal Council duo could then present these figures to their American counterparts, even if just as a rough guideline.
6) American Swiss Foundation: This foundation is a network of politicians, business leaders, and nonprofit representatives from both countries. The board includes former U.S. Ambassador to Switzerland, Edward McMullen. Recently, the foundation awarded the former Swiss Ambassador to Washington, Jacques Pitteloud. On the American side, both Republicans and Democrats are involved.
A self-affirmation of mutual appreciation would certainly not hurt at this stage. A call could be made by the high-profile personalities and the few hundred individuals associated with the foundation to further strengthen the good relationship between the two countries. A publication of this call in American and Swiss media, as well as on social media, would provide the initiative with the necessary visibility.
High-Hanging Fruits
1) Relying on Consumers for GM Food: The barriers to importing genetically modified foods are high in the EU and Switzerland, despite decades of experience with no evidence of harm. In the future, greater emphasis should be placed on consumer sovereignty. A mandatory labeling requirement would be sufficient, allowing consumers in restaurants and stores to decide for themselves what they put on their plates. This would be akin to a non-tariff trade liberalization for the USA, as the latter is a leader in green biotechnology.
2) A Welcoming Culture for Americans: This year, up to 8,500 qualified professionals from third countries, including the USA, can be recruited on the Swiss labor market. In the interest of promoting greater freedom, Switzerland could unilaterally lower the barriers for highly qualified workers from the USA. This would not only attract top talent to Switzerland but also send the following message: Americans are welcome in Switzerland. Such a considerate treatment would likely also appeal to the American government, and in the long term, there should be consideration of a demand-driven admission policy for highly skilled workers from all third countries.
3) Negotiations for a ‘Horizon USA/UK/CH’: Horizon Europe is an EU initiative that has been a great success in cutting-edge research. Switzerland could offer a proposal for a similar initiative involving the USA, the UK, and Switzerland. Such an alliance would unite the three countries, which dominate the QS World University Rankings with their top 20 global universities. With ETH Zurich and EPFL among the world’s best universities, the exchange among these top-notch establishments could align with the new administration, with loves to use superlatives. However, this approach would also make sense beyond Trump’s presidency. With Swissnex in Boston and San Francisco, Switzerland is already active in the hotspots of American research.
These nine proposals would benefit both the USA and Switzerland in the long term. Switzerland certainly has a lot to offer. The question, however, is what the Trump administration actually wants. This remains far from clear, politics being highly unpredictable. If the new American government solely focuses on reducing its trade deficit with other countries, then the two Swiss ministers might have to face a “mission: impossible” type of situation.
