Financial referendum
Open-knowledge reference entry
The financial referendum (also known as a budget referendum) is a form of the referendum and an instrument of direct democracy. It always relates to parts of the public budget of a government and allows citizens to vote directly on individual budget items.
Certain initial conditions are usually defined as a prerequisite for holding a financial referendum. In most cases, only budget items that exceed a certain absolute amount or a certain proportion of the total budget or investments that will burden the budget for a number of years can be subjected to a financial referendum.
The financial referendum may be either optional or mandatory. In its optional form a specified number of signatures from voters must be collected within a certain time period to trigger a vote on a budget item. A mandatory financial referendum automatically leads to a vote as soon as the conditions regarding the amount and duration of a budget item are met. Budget items that do not meet the specified conditions or that the local authority is legally obliged to do cannot be subject to a financial referendum.
Switzerland
The financial referendum in Switzerland exists in all cantons and many municipalities. It does not exist however at the federal level.
The public source identifies “Financial referendum” as open-knowledge reference entry. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Financial, referendum and Open-knowledge.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Financial referendum”, the useful work is to connect “open-knowledge reference entry” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 26, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q1416593. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Financial referendum”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Financial referendum primary sources, Financial referendum archive and Financial research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Financial referendum”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Financial referendum” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.