Background: The Paychère report and Vaud’s finances
The Paychère report, published in late August and authored by François Paychère, a former president of the Geneva Court of Audit, centers on the handling of the Vaud canton’s tax policy. It highlights that the Vaud “bouclier fiscal” shield was not applied in a manner fully compliant with rules during the tenure of the Department of Finance under then-director Pascal Broulis. A corrective move in 2021 changed the practice, curbing benefits that had disproportionately favored large taxpayers. According to the report, some of these taxpayers, upset by the correction, turned to the Conseil d’État toward the end of 2023 and, notably, named Valérie Dittli, who was overseeing finances at the time, as central to the ensuing political friction. The document suggests this dynamic contributed to a broader governance crisis within Vaud’s government.
The Studer report: another lens on governance
In March 2025, another inquiry led by Jean Studer examined allegations of abuse of authority and breach of official secrecy within the Finance Department when Valérie Dittli led it. The Studer report asserted that Dittli had asked for, or at least signaled, the suspension of tax processes that benefited the shield and the reversal of taxations already executed. The aim, according to the study, was to explore options in response to dissatisfaction from big taxpayers. The RTS (Swiss public broadcaster) reminded audiences that Dittli had previously denied the claim, clarifying that she did not issue orders but posed questions to seek solutions.
New details from the Paychère document
RTS reporting now indicates that the Paychère document aligns with Studer’s conclusions, asserting that Dittli summoned senior officials, especially within the taxation division, to urge the pausing of certain fiscal processes and possibly reconsidering active tax decisions following 2023 complaints. The account stresses that several collaborators reportedly refused to follow such directives, highlighting tensions between political oversight and administrative autonomy.
Response from Valérie Dittli and the broader implications
Valérie Dittli’s office again rejects the insinuations, reiterating that no order was given and that communications were meant to elicit information and identify workable solutions. The convergence of the Paychère findings with Studer’s concerns has intensified scrutiny of Vaud’s governance framework, prompting questions about how financial policy is shaped, how accountability is maintained, and how transparent the decision-making process is for the public and taxpayers alike.
What this means for Vaud politics
The ongoing discourse surrounding the two reports underscores a broader issue in Vaud: the balance between fiscal policy flexibility for taxpayers and the integrity of administrative processes. As investigators explore the trajectories of the bouclier fiscal and the related decisions, observers consider how trust between citizens, authorities, and elected officials can be maintained. The canton’s government has signaled its willingness to cooperate with inquiries while defending the substance of its policies and the professionalism of its staff.
Looking ahead
With the Paychère report adding a new layer to the narrative and Studer’s findings continuing to echo in public debate, Vaud faces a pivotal moment. The questions focus on governance mechanisms, the proper scope of political influence over administrative actions, and the safeguards that ensure policy choices are made in the light of day. As investigations proceed, the public awaits clarifications about what happened, who authorized actions, and how reforms will shape future tax policy in Vaud.
