On 24 September 2017, Swiss voters rejected the « Old-Age Provision 2020 » reform. The act was refused by 52.7 % of voters, while the additional VAT financing failed by just 2,357 votes and without a majority of cantons. Turnout was about 47.1 %.
Championed by Federal Councillor Alain Berset, the reform planned to raise women's retirement age to 65, lower the second-pillar conversion rate, offset this with a 70-franc supplement on new AHV pensions, and raise VAT by 0.3 points.
The project drew an unusual coalition against it: the right, which found the 70-franc supplement too costly, and part of the left, hostile to raising women's retirement age. Five years later, the AHV 21 reform would take up the key measures.
This fact sheet tests the campaign arguments against the facts observed since the vote.
▲ Cantons that accepted Jura (56.8 %), Fribourg (54.1 %), Ticino (53.9 %) and Neuchâtel (51.8 %). | ▼ Cantons that rejected A majority of German-speaking cantons, plus Geneva (60.3 % no) and, narrowly, Vaud (50.9 %). |
Actors and personalities
▲ Yes camp • Alain Berset Federal Councillor, architect of the bill • Social Democrats and Greens the left • Centre (CVP) and part of the centre • SGB main trade unions | ▼ No camp • SVP and FDP the right, against the cost • Green Liberals economiesuisse, SGV • Part of the left against women's retirement at 65 |
Arguments and verdicts
▲ Arguments FOR (2) Reform now, or the situation will worsen « Delaying the reform will only deepen the AHV deficit and complicate the task. » — Yes supporters, 2017 ✓ Argument confirmed The delay did cost time: it took five years and the AHV 21 reform (approved on 25 September 2022) to stabilise the AHV, with the same key measure. Source: FSIO / admin.ch, AHV 21 vote (2022). Raising women's retirement age to 65 is necessary « Without this measure, the AHV's balance is not sustainable. » — Federal Council, 2017 ✓~ Partly confirmed The measure was taken up and approved in 2022 within AHV 21 — but narrowly (50.5 % yes), confirming that it remained possible while staying divisive. Source: FSO, AHV 21 vote of 25 September 2022. | ▼ Arguments AGAINST (2) The 70-franc supplement is a costly, poorly targeted handout « Adding 70 francs to every new pension is a disproportionate expense. » — FDP / SVP, 2017 ✓ Argument confirmed The criticism was vindicated: AHV 21 stabilised the scheme without this supplement, which was dropped. Mixing provision with a benefits increase was rightly identified as a flaw. Source: FSIO, comparison OAP2020 / AHV 21. Raising women's retirement age without pay equality is unfair « As long as wages are unequal, making women work an extra year is inequitable. » — Part of the left, 2017 ✗~ Partly refuted The measure was ultimately adopted in 2022 and upheld by the Federal Supreme Court in December 2024, despite a financial-projection error admitted by the FSIO. The fairness grievance remains, but did not prevent it taking effect. Source: Federal Supreme Court, December 2024 ruling; RTS. |
Factual record
2 Confirmed | 1 Partly confirmed | 1 Partly refuted | 0 Refuted |
| ✓ | The reform ultimately succeeded with AHV 21 Five years after the failure, the AHV 21 reform was approved on 25 September 2022: raising women's retirement age to 65 (50.5 % yes) and financing via a VAT increase (55.1 %). The key 2017 measures were thus taken up. Source: FSO, vote of 25 September 2022. |
| ~ | Five years' delay, a razor-thin margin and an FSIO error The reform only passed in 2022, and narrowly; the Federal Social Insurance Office admitted in 2024 to having erred in its financial projections. The Federal Supreme Court nonetheless dismissed the appeals and validated the vote in December 2024. Source: Federal Supreme Court / RTS, December 2024. |
The rejection of « Old-Age Provision 2020 » illustrates how hard it is to reform the AHV in Switzerland: a balancing project, brought down by an unnatural alliance of the right and part of the left, each for opposing reasons.
The verdict of facts proves both camps right on distinct points. Supporters were right about urgency: it took five years and a new reform to stabilise the scheme. The right was right about the 70-franc supplement, later dropped.
The feminist left, which denounced the unfairness of women's retirement at 65, did not win on the substance: the measure was adopted in 2022 and upheld by the Federal Supreme Court in 2024, despite the projection error acknowledged by the FSIO. The pay-equality debate, however, remains open.
Ultimately, the 2017 « no » did not avert the reform: it delayed it by five years and refocused it on the essentials, with women's retirement age finally rising to 65, but by a razor-thin margin.