What this is about
Every year, Swiss taxpayers receive documents they attach to their tax return: the tax statement from their bank, certificates for contributions to the second pillar and pillar 3a, and confirmations from their health insurer. For a long time these were freely designed PDFs that taxpayers or tax offices had to retype by hand. The eCH association, which develops e-government standards in Switzerland, defines uniform data structures and a machine-readable 2D barcode for these documents. The data can then flow directly into tax software and cantonal systems.
For issuing institutions this means a well-designed PDF is no longer enough. The document must match the schema of the version in force, the barcode must be read without errors, and both must be right again for every tax year.
- Affected are banks, brokers, asset managers, pension foundations, life insurers and health insurers.
- The core question: develop in-house or buy a generator module?
- What matters is not the initial cost but the effort for schema updates and testing over many years.
Which standards are involved
Three document types are in focus. The electronic tax statement has been established for years; the other two standards are newer and are being introduced step by step.
| Standard | Content | Typical issuers | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| eCH-0196 | E-tax statement for securities and accounts | Banks, brokers, asset managers | Established, widely supported by the cantons |
| eCH-0248 | Certificate of pension contributions, 2nd pillar and 3a | Banks, pension foundations, life insurers | New, introduced through pilot phases |
| eCH-0275 | Tax certificate from health insurers | Basic and supplementary health insurers | New, early adoption phase |
Check the current status
Version numbers, pilot phases and rollout dates change. What counts are the documents currently published on ech.ch and the cantonal requirements for the relevant tax year. Never plan a project solely on the basis of vendor slides.
What a generator must do
Whether you build or buy, a solution should meet the following requirements. The list also works as the backbone of a specification.
- Schema compliance: output generated against the valid eCH version, with automatic validation before dispatch.
- Barcode: correct encoding and page layout, tested with real scanners and tax software.
- Data enrichment: for tax statements, for example, security numbers, prices and income in the required form.
- Interfaces: an API for single documents and batch processing for the annual run with tens of thousands of documents.
- Multi-tenancy and roles if several companies or client segments are served.
- Audit logging, so you can prove which document was generated with which data.
- Regression tests per tax year so that older documents remain reproducible.
The most expensive mistake is a document that looks right but whose barcode is rejected by the tax software.
Build or buy compared
Building in-house looks attractive at first because the data already sits in the core system. The effort, however, does not come with the first release but with maintenance: every new schema version, every cantonal change and every new document type requires development, testing and sign-off.
| Criterion | In-house build | Purchased module |
|---|---|---|
| Control over code and data | Complete | Depends on contract and architecture |
| Effort for schema updates | Internal, recurring every year | With the vendor, covered by the licence |
| Know-how risk | High if few people hold the knowledge | Lower, but dependence on the vendor |
| Time to adopt new standards | Depends on internal capacity | Often shorter if the vendor implements early |
| Cost structure | Project plus staff | Recurring licence and support fees |
A rule of thumb: if you issue only one standard at a manageable volume and have an experienced development team, an in-house build can be justified. If you handle several document types, several tenants or tight IT resources, a maintained module is usually more predictable.
Costs and contract points
Vendors often charge per module and per tenant, plus support plans with different response times. As an order of magnitude, one Swiss vendor, datalevel AG, quotes around CHF 5'000 a year for the e-tax statement module and around CHF 2'000 a year for each of the newer document types, according to the vendor, excluding VAT and support. Such figures are a reference point, not a market price.
- What exactly does the licence include: schema updates, barcode engine, documentation, onboarding?
- How quickly is a new eCH version implemented, and is this guaranteed in the contract?
- Which response times apply during the annual run in January and February?
- Where is data processed, and how is data processing on behalf governed under the revised Data Protection Act?
- How do you retrieve templates, logs and test cases if you switch vendor?
Budgeting tip
For an in-house build, count not only development hours but also testing, coordination with tax authorities and cover for key people. Only then is a comparison with licence fees fair.