As of: February, 04 2026
Current Issues and Topics
In our bi-monthly update, we provide a detailed overview of the business relevant to our association. This includes the content of the transactions, the status and outlook of the political process and our positions. The update is also available as a PDF via a button at the bottom of the page.
Use the buttons to go directly to the respective department:
Law Department
Draft Register of Beneficial Owners
↺ Updated information is available here.
The bill provides for a federal register of beneficial owners and measures to strengthen the fight against money laundering. Both drafts were passed in the 2025 autumn session. The consultation on the implementing ordinance for the transparency register ran until the end of January. The law is expected to come into force in mid-2026 at the earliest, in time for the FATF country review in 2027. SwissHoldings supports the bill in principle, but rejects the current draft implementing ordinance as it deviates from the overarching law.
Contents
The bill (24.046) had two main objectives: On the one hand, it aimed to increase the transparency of legal entities in order to enable the authorities to identify beneficial owners more efficiently. To this end, a federal register of beneficial owners will be introduced. On the other hand, certain advisory activities will in future be subject to the Anti-Money Laundering Act with corresponding due diligence obligations in order to improve the effectiveness of the fight against money laundering. The measures proposed in the adopted bill were intended to take into account the international standards of the Financial Action Task Force and the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes.
State
In the 2025 autumn session, the National Council and Council of States approved both drafts, the transparency register and the partial revision of the Anti-Money Laundering Act.
The consultation on the ordinance on the transparency of legal entities and the identification of beneficial owners ran until January 30, 2026 (submission by SwissHoldings in German).
Outlook
The transparency register and the amendments to the Anti-Money Laundering Act are expected to come into force in mid-2026 at the earliest, following the evaluation of the responses to the consultation on the implementing ordinances.
Position
SwissHoldings fundamentally supports the bill and welcomes the fact that Parliament has completed the final vote in time for the upcoming FATF country review in 2027, so as not to weaken Switzerland’s position as a business location. However, the association rejects the current version of the implementing ordinance, as it is not consistent with the overarching TJPG law.
Revision of the Financial Market Infrastructure Act (FinMIA)
The Financial Market Infrastructure Act (FinMIA) is undergoing a periodic and general review. A report by the FDF shows that it has proven itself for the most part. However, transparency and legal certainty in certain areas of regulation in particular are to be strengthened. A consultation on the revision was held in 2024 and the message is expected in mid-2026. SwissHoldings welcomes improvements in the area of derivatives regulation in principle, but firmly rejects any weakening of self-regulation.
Contents
The FinMIA regulates the authorization and obligations of financial infrastructures as well as the conduct obligations of financial market participants in securities and derivatives trading. Even before it came into force in January 2016, the Federal Council announced that the Federal Department of Finance (FDF) would conduct a general review of the FinMIA and prepare a report. In this report, the FDF concludes that the FinMIA has largely proven its worth since it came into force. However, it is necessary to further strengthen transparency and legal certainty in certain areas of regulation.
State
A consultation was held from June to October 2024. SwissHoldings submitted its response on October 4, 2024. The FDF is currently evaluating the consultation responses but has postponed the matter. The Federal Council has also decided to bring into force the reporting obligation for small non-financial counterparties with regard to derivative transactions as of January 1, 2028.
Outlook
According to the FDF, the message on the FinMIA revision is to be published in mid-2026.
Position
The proposed amendments to the regulation of derivatives are fundamentally an improvement and therefore to be welcomed. However, SwissHoldings clearly rejects the transfer of issuer obligations such as ad hoc notifications of shareholdings or the reporting and publication of management transactions from self-regulation to state regulation under the supervision of FINMA. Self-regulation has proven its worth and should not be abandoned without good reason, but rather retained as a locational advantage. SwissHoldings has taken a corresponding position
Amendment of the Cartel Act: Material Partial Revision
↺ Updated information is available here.
The partial revision of the Cartel Act aims to modernize Swiss merger control. In the 2025 winter session, the Council of States followed the National Council’s compromise proposal on the assessment of agreements. In the final vote, the partial revision of the Cartel Act was approved. The referendum period runs until April 2026, with the amendment scheduled to come into force at the beginning of 2027. SwissHoldings welcomes the fact that authorities and courts must (once again) examine the actual effects of an agreement or conduct and demonstrate its harmfulness to competition.
Contents
The bill for the partial revision of the Cartel Act (23.047) includes a change from the qualified market dominance test to the Significant Impediment to Effective Competition Test (SIEC test). It thus aims to harmonize the practices of the Competition Commission (COMCO) with international standards. In addition, the objection procedure is to be made more practical by eliminating the direct risk of sanctions if an investigation is not opened within the shortened time limit. The main points of discussion in the partial revision were the provisions on competition agreements (Art. 5 CA) and the conduct of market-dominating companies (Art. 7 CA). The preliminary draft contained an implementation proposal for Motion 18.4282 Français, which was adopted in June 2021 and takes qualitative and quantitative criteria into account. Finally, rules on the principle of investigation, the presumption of innocence, and the burden of proof are included in order to implement the requirements of Motion 21.4189 Wicki.
State
During the 2025 winter session, the Council of States follows the compromise proposal of the National Council. In the final vote on December 19, 2025, the partial revision of the Cartel Act has been adopted.
Outlook
The partial revision of the Cartel Act is expected to come into force at the beginning of 2027. The amendments to the corresponding implementing ordinances have not yet been finalized. The referendum period for the law is currently still running until April 17, 2026.
Position
SwissHoldings welcomes the fact that Parliament has implemented the Français and Wicki motions. Both motions require authorities and courts to (once again) examine the actual effects of an agreement or conduct and to demonstrate its harmfulness to competition. We would have considered enshrining the GABA practice in the Cartel Act to be contrary to both motions.
Amendment of the Cartel Act: Institutional reform
↺ Updated information is available here.
Following the conclusion of the revision of the Cartel Act, the Federal Council is continuing to push ahead with institutional reform of the competition authority. This is intended to resolve problems in administrative proceedings, in particular the separation of the decision-making and investigative authorities and the acceleration of the appeal process. The message is expected in the first half of 2026. SwissHoldings supports the reform of competition commission and advocates a clear separation between the investigating and decision-making authorities and the strengthening of the appeal process.
Contents
The revision of the competition authorities (hereinafter: institutional reform) is intended to address problems in administrative proceedings in general, including in particular the separation of decision-making and investigative authorities.
The published final report of the expert commission chaired by former federal judge Hansjörg Seiler concluded that COMCO functions well in principle and does not exhibit any constitutional deficiencies. Accordingly, a change in the system is not warranted. The separation between the investigating and decision-making authorities is now to be made more effective, among other things by having the secretariat conduct investigations consistently without the involvement of COMCO. In its consultation draft of June 13, 2025, the Federal Council followed the recommendations of the expert commission as a first step. The Federal Council intends to make the “separation” between the investigating and decision-making authorities more effective through the following measures: reducing the size and focus of the commission; eliminating the involvement of the commission or individual members in the investigation; and legally regulating the role of the secretariat in advising the COMCO on decisions.
Digression: Despite the work already initiated and published on June 13, 2025, by the Federal Council with a view to reforming the competition authorities, on March 17, 2025, the Council of States adopted the motion 22.4404 Rechsteiner “Accelerate proceedings. Increase legal certainty.” In doing so, the Council of States is expressing its desire to address the issue of the institutional separation between the investigating and deciding authorities on the one hand, and the question of the length of proceedings on the other. The National Council had already approved the motion in the spring session a year ago. Following the Council of States, the National Council approved the concerns of the motion 23.3224 Français “Institutional reform of the competition authority” on June 4, 2025. The Federal Council must now make an implementation proposal for both motions.
State
On June 13, 2025, the Federal Council opened the consultation process on the proposed revision of the competition authority, which ended on October 6, 2025. SwissHoldings submitted its response to the draft (see consultation response ) on October 1, 2025. SECO then examined the possibility of introducing commission clerks in more detail in an additional questionnaire, as this solution was requested several times in the consultation responses.
Outlook
SECO will review the responses to the commission clerk model and is expected to publish the message on institutional reform in the first half of 2026.
Position
SwissHoldings welcomes the fact that the much-demanded institutional reform has been taken up in parallel with the revision of the substantive Cartel Act and supports the critical discussion and in-depth examination of the institutional reform. SwissHoldings advocates a clear separation between the investigating and decision-making authorities. In order to strengthen the Competition Commission and achieve a clearer separation between the decision-making authority and the secretariat as the investigating authority, we consider the introduction of commission clerks at the Competition Commission to be a minimum requirement. In addition, we call for the acceleration and strengthening of the appeal process, ideally through the creation of an independent court – similar to the Patent Court – or at least an independent competition division within the Federal Administrative Court.
Motion Rüegsegger “Introduce Sector Inquiries. Resolve Structural Competition Issues”
↺ Updated information is available here.
Motion 24.4590 Rüegsegger calls for the introduction of sector inquiries as a supplementary instrument in the Cartel Act. This would enable the Competition Commission to analyze markets for structural competition problems on a preventive basis, even without concrete suspicion. On February 19, 2025, the Federal Council proposed rejecting the motion. With the publication of the report on postulate 23.3444 assessing the significance of the merger between UBS and CS in terms of competition law and the economy, the basis announced by the Federal Council for assessing the motion is now available. The Federal Council continues to reject the introduction of this instrument. Against this background, it can be assumed that the motion will now be further processed. SwissHoldings rejects the motion, as it considers the existing instruments of the Competition Commission to be sufficient and does not consider an extension of its powers to be necessary.
Contents
The introduction of sector inquiries in accordance with the motion 24.4590 (Sector inquiries in the Cartel Act) would enable the COMCO to analyze markets preventively for structural competition problems, even without sufficient grounds for suspicion. The instrument can help to remove structural barriers such as market entry barriers, information asymmetries, or distortions of competition. The motion is justified on the grounds that the introduction of sector inquiries in the Cartel Act strengthens the competition authorities, promotes market transparency, improves the functioning of competition in the long term, and provides the COMCO with the same instruments as the EU competition authorities. The Federal Council is of the opinion that this instrument and its possible design must be thoroughly evaluated and subjected to a well-founded cost-benefit analysis before it is introduced. As part of its response to the EATC-N’s postulate 23.3444 “Merger of UBS and CS. Assessment of the significance in terms of competition law and the economy,” the Federal Council is currently examining the advantages and disadvantages of the instrument of sector inquiries under competition law.
State
On February 19, 2025, the Federal Council proposed rejecting the motion. In addition, on December 12, 2025, the Report of the Federal Council in fulfillment of postulate 23.3444 EATC-N of April 4, 2023 was presented. It concludes that the introduction of a sector inquiry under competition law should be refrained from.
Outlook
With the publication of postulate report 23.3444, the basis announced by the Federal Council for assessing motion 24.4590 is now available. Against this background, it can be assumed that the motion will now be further processed, taking into account the Federal Council’s negative stance.
Position
SwissHoldings welcomes the clear words of the Federal Council and rejects the Rüegsegger motion, as the Competition Commission already has sufficient means at its disposal, such as conducting market observations, drafting expert reports, and issuing recommendations. It should therefore apply the existing instruments.
Parliamentary Initiative Roduit "Non-compliance with mandatory working conditions consti-tutes qualified unfair competition and must be prosecuted criminally"
↺ Updated information is available here.
The Roduit parliamentary initiative (21.470) calls for intentional violations of mandatory working conditions to also be prosecuted under the UCA. Once the consultation process with the RK-N has been completed, the committee will discuss the matter in early 2026. SwissHoldings is committed to compliance with mandatory working conditions, but rejects the Roduit initiative on the grounds that existing protective regulations are sufficient.
Contents
According to the Federal Act Against Unfair Competition (UCA), violations of mandatory working conditions are already considered unfair competition and can be punished. The parliamentary initiative 21.470 demands that intentional violations of mandatory working conditions also be prosecuted under the UCA.
State
The initiative was submitted on June 17, 2021. The LAC-N opened the consultation process on April 30, 2025. SwissHoldings submitted its consultation response on August 19, 2025 .
Outlook
The LAC-N has yet to evaluate the consultation responses. The LAC-N is expected to discuss the matter on February 12/13, 2026.
Position
SwissHoldings advocates compliance with mandatory working conditions and supports the view that non-compliance with mandatory working conditions should continue to constitute an unfair competition offense. However, we reject the Roduit parliamentary initiative, as there are already a number of existing protective regulations in place for employees that contain corresponding penal provisions. Additional criminal liability under the UCA does little to minimize the risk of conflicts of law, does not answer the questions of jurisdiction that need to be resolved, and would thus lead to double criminal liability. The existing instruments should be applied and no additional provisions should be added.
Parliamentary Initiative Burkart “More flexibility for working from home.”
↺ Updated information is available here.
The parliamentary initiative Burkart (16.484) aims to adapt the legal framework for working from home and flexible forms of work to the digital world of work. In September 2025, the National Council considered the bill and decided on a right to be unreachable, a working time window of 17 hours, a rest period of 9 hours, and up to 9 Sundays of teleworking per year. The EATC-S began detailed deliberations in January 2026 and will continue to discuss the bill in the second quarter of 2026, once the administration has answered questions regarding application and interpretation. SwissHoldings supports the bill as a step toward greater flexibility and modernity in labor law.
Contents
The parliamentary initiative 16.484 takes into account the opportunities offered by the digitalization of the world of work. In particular, it allows better consideration to be given to the needs of employees who work from home. This also optimizes the compatibility of work, family, and leisure time, taking into account health and safety regulations in the workplace.
State
The draft bill proposed by the EATC-N was adopted by the National Council in its autumn session. Among other things, it decided on a general right to be unreachable, an extension of the working time window to 17 hours, a reduction in rest periods to 9 hours, and the possibility of up to 9 Sundays of teleworking per year. The matter was then referred to the Council of States. The EATC-S began its detailed deliberations at its meeting on January 22, 2026, and decided that the administration still had to answer outstanding questions regarding specific application and interpretation.
Outlook
The EATC-S is expected to continue deliberating on the matter in the second quarter of 2026.
Position
This parliamentary initiative is an important step in the right direction. Employers and, more broadly, the economy need flexible working conditions that better suit the personal needs and capabilities of employees. SwissHoldings supports the proposal.
Motion Gössi “Better protection of intellectual property from AI misuse.”
↺ Updated information is available here.
The motion originally called for an opt-in mechanism whereby copyright-protected content could only be used for training AI systems with the express consent of the rights holders. In its fall 2025 session, the National Council approved an openly worded version. The Council of States approved this version in December 2025, and the openly worded motion was referred to the Federal Council. This marks the start of the FDJP’s work on drafting amendments to the Copyright Act. SwissHoldings emphasizes that the fundamentals must first be clarified in order to generate a viable solution for all economic stakeholders.
Contents
Motion 24.4596 focuses on the copyright treatment of AI training data. The motion calls for the enforcement of an opt-in mechanism that only allows the use of copyright-protected content for AI systems with the prior express consent of the rights-holders
State
The National Council, as the second chamber, adopted an amended, openly worded version. The Council of States approved this on December 11, 2025. The motion has thus been referred to the Federal Council.
Outlook
The FDJP will now draft an initial proposal for the amendment of the Copyright Act.
Position
The opt-in mechanism would be at odds with numerous other countries, which are increasingly moving towards an opt-out approach whereby rights holders can prohibit the use of their content by AI systems. In our view, Switzerland’s initial plan to go it alone would create regulatory uncertainty, could hamper research and development, particularly among start-ups and universities, and weaken international connectivity. When drafting an initial version, the fundamentals must first be clarified in order to generate a viable solution for all economic operators. In our view, copyright protection requirements could be strengthened using other instruments, such as a form of collective management.
Taxation Department
Extension of Loss Carry-Forward
↺ Updated information is available here.
The federal law on extending loss carry-forwards extends the period for loss carry-forwards from seven to ten years. The regulation is to apply retroactively from the 2020 tax year. The aim is to strengthen economic resilience and give companies more flexibility after crises. The Council of States approved the bill in the winter session as the second chamber, and the matter was adopted in the final vote. SwissHoldings expressly supports the extension. In view of increasing uncertainties, a seven-year carry-forward period is no longer appropriate.
Contents
The Federal Act on the Extension of Loss Carry-forwards (24.091) implements the motion (21.3001) of the EATC-N “Possibility of extending loss offsetting to ten years.” The aim is to enable companies and self-employed persons who have suffered losses during the coronavirus pandemic to claim these losses for tax purposes over a period of ten years instead of the previous seven. The extension is to apply from the 2020 tax year and must come into force by January 1, 2028, at the latest. The measure is intended to strengthen economic resilience.
State
In the 2025 summer session, the National Council, as the first chamber, clearly approved the extension. The Council of States also approved it in the winter session. On December 19, 2025, the bill was passed in the final vote.
Outlook
The referendum period runs until April 17, 2026. The Federal Council will then decide on the date of entry into force.
Position
SwissHoldings supports the extension of loss carryforward. In recent years, solid companies have faced special economic challenges such as tariffs, pandemics, sanctions, and wars more frequently than in the past. Added to this are recessions in certain sales markets (e.g., China) and rapid technological change (e.g., AI). All these factors can cause solid companies to suffer deeper and more frequent losses. Against this backdrop, Switzerland’s loss carryforward period of only seven years simply seems too short in today’s world. An international comparison also shows that many countries allow loss carry-forward for more than 10 years. An attractive business location should be able to offer its companies the option of offsetting 2-3 special events within ten years. If a country succeeds in continuously improving its attractiveness as a business location and thus remains among the top global locations, tax revenues are likely to increase. Extending loss carry-forward will make a small contribution to ensuring that this remains the case for Switzerland in the future.
Motions EATC-S / EATC-N "Ensuring legal certainty in the implementation of the OECD minimum taxation"
↺ Updated information is available here.
Motions 25.4392 and 25.4399 call for a time limit on the application of the OECD guideline of January 15, 2025, on Article 9.1 of the GloBE model rules. The motions were adopted by both chambers during the winter session and thus referred to the Federal Council. If Switzerland were to waive the taxation prescribed by the aforementioned guideline by means of a Swiss supplementary tax (QDMTT), as demanded by the motion, it would risk losing its qualified minimum tax status, with considerable risks such as double taxation and increased administrative costs for the companies affected. SwissHoldings therefore rejected the motions and is now advocating for a measured implementation.
Contents
The two identical motions (25.4392 and 25.4399) aim to limit the application of the OECD guideline of January 15, 2025, on Article 9.1 of the GloBE model rules. The guideline should only apply to tax breaks and the deferred taxes generated by them that were granted from the beginning of 2025. The guideline should not apply to tax breaks granted earlier, even if these lead to a reduction or even complete elimination of any Swiss minimum tax, particularly in the years 2026 to 2033.
This is justified by the fact that a retroactive redefinition of the term “transaction” was carried out in accordance with section 9.1.2. of the GloBE model rules of December 2021 (and no clarification).
State
The two identical motions were adopted by the respective chambers during the winter session.
Outlook
The motions have thus been referred to the Federal Council. The consultation process on amending the minimum tax ordinance in line with the motions is expected to begin in the spring.
Position
If Switzerland were to waive the taxation prescribed by the aforementioned guideline by means of a Swiss supplementary tax (QDMTT), as demanded by the motions, the Swiss minimum tax could no longer be considered qualified. This would lead to considerable disadvantages for many Swiss companies affected by the OECD minimum tax (double taxation, significantly increased administrative costs, etc.). For this reason, SwissHoldings and almost all of its member companies rejected the motions.
SwissHoldings is now campaigning for a measured approach to implementation. As a first step, the risks and consequences of amending the minimum taxation ordinance must be analyzed in detail as part of a consultation process. In addition, the association clearly advocates the so-called narrow interpretation as the lesser evil. This provides for protection only for the 2024 tax year. During the parliamentary debate, it was expressly emphasized that this solution would be compatible with the motions. At the same time, the option of a write-off should also be examined in view of the timing.
Motions to Strengthen Switzerland's Attractiveness as a Business Location
↺ Updated information is available here.
Various identical motions were submitted in both chambers (25.4192 and 25.4264, 25.4191 and 25.4265, and 25.4393 and 25.4400) with the aim of strengthening Switzerland’s attractiveness as a business location. All motions except 25.4400 were debated and adopted by the first chamber during the last winter session. SwissHoldings welcomes the motions and the associated examination of new instruments to strengthen Switzerland’s attractiveness as a business location. In particular, the substance-based tax incentives newly approved by the OECD should be examined more closely.
Contents
The six motions, three of which are identical, submitted to both chambers have the same goal. They all aim to strengthen Switzerland’s attractiveness as a business location.
The motions 25.4192 and 25.4264, submitted by Council of States member Benjamin Mühlemann and National Council member Andri Silberschmidt, call on the Federal Council to take measures to strengthen corporate investment activity in Switzerland and thereby improve economic momentum. In particular, the Federal Council should examine accelerated depreciation and tax credits for large investments in order to specifically reduce investment costs in Switzerland.
Motions 25.4191 and 25.4265, also submitted by Council of States member Benjamin Mühlemann and National Council member Andri Silberschmidt, call on the Federal Council to take measures to encourage companies to conduct more research, development, and production in Switzerland and to distribute their products and services worldwide. In particular, additional tax deductions for production costs and new tax credits for research and development activities should be considered.
The motions submitted by the two EATC committees 25.4393 and 25.4400 call on the Federal Council to develop a strategy for sustainably increasing Switzerland’s attractiveness as a business location.
State
During the last winter session, the four Mühlemann/Silberschmidt motions and the WAK-N motion were adopted by the first chamber.
The debate on motion 25.4400 in the Council of States has been postponed.
Outlook
The Mühlemann/Silberschmidt motions will now go to the respective EATC of the second chamber. The EATC motion will be discussed in the Council of States in the next step.
Position
Switzerland’s attractiveness as a business location is currently under considerable pressure. SwissHoldings explicitly welcomes efforts to improve this and advocates considering new instruments in the process.
The motions propose various solutions as promising improvements to Switzerland’s attractiveness as a business location. In particular, the substance-based tax incentives newly approved by the OECD should be examined more closely. These allow companies with substance, such as those that conduct research, development, and production in Switzerland and distribute their products and services worldwide, to benefit from tax relief and promote the creation and preservation of skilled jobs in particular (e.g., in the areas of R&D&I, high-quality production, etc.). It would therefore be incomprehensible if the Federal Council and Parliament did not examine this new internationally permissible instrument.
Amendment Protocol to the Agreement between Switzerland and the European Union on the Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI Agreement)
↺ Updated information is available here.
The automatic exchange of information (AEOI) between Switzerland and the EU will be adapted to the revised OECD standard by means of an amending protocol, with the existing provisions, in particular Article 9 on withholding tax exemption between affiliated companies, remaining unchanged. For many internationally active Swiss industrial and service companies, Article 9 is a key location factor for Switzerland as a headquarters, research, development, IP, and financing location. The consultation process on the amendment protocol is currently running until February 6, 2026. SwissHoldings supports the ratification of the amendment protocol to the AEOI agreement with the EU.
Contents
Since 2017, the automatic exchange of information (AEOI) between Switzerland and the EU has regulated the mutual exchange of financial account data to promote tax compliance in cross-border matters. An amendment protocol now adapts the existing agreement to the revised OECD standard, which Switzerland will implement from 2026. Provisions on mutual administrative assistance in the recovery of VAT claims have also been added, with minimum amounts and flat-rate cost reimbursements intended to limit the administrative burden. The existing provisions of the agreement, in particular those relating to withholding tax exemptions (Art. 9) between affiliated companies, remain unchanged.
State
On October 22, 2025, the Federal Council opened the consultation process on the amendment protocol to the AEOI agreement.
Outlook
The consultation period will remain open until February 6, 2026. SwissHoldings will participate by submitting a statement. The amendment protocol will then be submitted to parliament for approval.
Position
SwissHoldings supports the ratification of the amendment protocol to the AEOI agreement with the EU.
SwissHoldings attaches great importance to the AEOI agreement with the EU due to the advantages of Article 9 for many internationally active Swiss industrial and service companies. Article 9 of the AEOI agreement is a key location factor for Switzerland as a headquarters and principal location, as well as for research, development, IP, and financing, and thus for many of the most important taxpayers of the federal government and cantons. The elimination of this provision as a result of the non-ratification of the amending protocol would have a lasting negative impact on Switzerland’s attractiveness as a business location and lead to higher foreign withholding taxes and significantly lower tax revenues in Switzerland. Article 9 is particularly relevant where there are qualitative gaps in the bilateral double taxation agreements with individual EU member states, especially in relation to Italy.
OECD/G20 project on the Taxation of the Digital Economy
↺ Updated information is available here.
The OECD/G20 project on the taxation of the digital economy comprises a profit redistribution (Pillar 1) and the introduction of a global minimum tax of 15% for large corporations (Pillar 2). While Pillar 1 is blocked, Pillar 2, the global minimum tax, has already been implemented by various countries, including Switzerland. In January 2026, the OECD published the so-called Side-by-Side Package, which effectively exempts US companies from the OECD minimum tax by recognizing the American system. Among other things, the package also includes OECD-compliant tax relief on labor costs and investments. SwissHoldings is committed to ensuring that Switzerland examines how it can use this to strengthen its own attractiveness as a business location.
Contents
The OECD project on the taxation of the digital economy aims to improve the acceptance of international corporate taxation. The project is being driven forward as part of the “OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS” (hereinafter: IF), which comprises over 140 countries. It consists of two pillars. Pillar 1 involves a greater redistribution of profits from the world’s 200 most successful corporations from their home countries to the countries where they operate. Pillar 2 involves the introduction of a minimum profit tax of 15 percent for all corporations with a turnover of at least EUR 750 million.
State
The implementation of Pillar 1 has not yet progressed beyond work at the OECD level. Pillar 2, the global minimum tax, has been implemented in whole or in part by more than 60 countries, including the EU and Switzerland. However, the majority of IF member states have still not implemented any of the three minimum tax elements (QDMTT, IIR, and UTPR). These include economic heavyweights such as the US, China, and India.
In January 2025, the US demanded that US tax law be considered equivalent to the OECD minimum tax and that US tax law should coexist with it in the form of a side-by-side system. Under political pressure from the US, the G7 countries agreed in a joint statement (link to G7 statement) to implement the side-by-side system (SbS system).
In January 2026, the OECD published the side-by-side package, which was approved by all IF countries and will apply from the 2026 financial year. This includes the SbS Safe Harbor, the exemption from OECD minimum taxation demanded by the US. It is possible that other countries, such as Brazil, China, and possibly India, will seek to meet the requirements for the SbS Safe Harbor in the future and benefit from its advantages. In addition to the SbS Safe Harbor, the package contains further adjustments:
- Ultimate Parent Entity (UPE) Safe Harbor: This provides for an exemption from the application of the UTPR in the country of the parent company and could be attractive for large countries (e.g., India) that have not yet introduced minimum taxation and have many corporations that are primarily active domestically and in other non-minimum taxation countries.
- Simplified ETR Safe Harbor: This includes simplifications in the calculation of the complicated minimum tax calculation requirements. The OECD also intends to develop further simplifications.
- Transitional CbCR Safe Harbor: This existing safe harbor, which is already used by many corporations, provides for simplified calculations and may now be used for another year (2027).
- Substance-based Tax Incentive Safe Harbor: Finally, the SbS package gives countries the option of providing tax deductions that comply with the minimum tax. Specifically, companies may fall below the minimum tax threshold by either 5.5% of their total wage costs in a country or 5.5% of their depreciation on property, plant, and equipment (or 1% of their property, plant, and equipment holdings) in a country. These new substance-based tax incentives thus allow companies with substance (personnel, property, plant, and equipment) to benefit from significant tax relief depending on their situation and to promote the creation and preservation of skilled jobs in particular (e.g., in the areas of R&D&I, DEMPE, high-value production, etc.). However, states must provide for the new deductions in their domestic law. If this is the case, then taxation of less than 15 percent does not violate the minimum tax.
Finally, the SbS package includes the announcement of a stocktake for 2029, the implementation of new peer reviews, and the reinforcement of the importance of QDMTTs. It is clearly stated that discriminatory and conditional supplementary taxes imposed by other countries do not have to be recognized as so-called covered taxes.
Outlook
In the course of 2026, the IF is expected to adopt further important guidelines:
- Safe harbor implementation tool: This will enable significant changes to be decided without adjustments to the model rules, allowing the EU to refrain from amending its minimum tax directive. Amendments to the directive must be decided unanimously by the 27 EU member states, which is politically difficult to achieve.
- Simplifications of the Simplified ETR Safe Harbor
- Simplification of the GloBE Information Return (GIR)
- Guidance on related benefits: This is intended to establish the rules under which countries may grant subsidies, refundable tax credits (QRTCs), and other benefits to companies, in particular those affected by the minimum tax.
- Rules for dispute resolution
- Rules for conducting comprehensive peer reviews will be established.
At the same time, various countries are likely to undertake legislative projects to transpose the SbS package into national law. Numerous countries will examine in detail whether and how they can improve their attractiveness as a location thanks to the new substance-based tax incentives.
Position
With the minimum tax, the OECD has created a new international standard. This means that both subsidiaries of foreign corporations and Swiss corporations must be subject to the Swiss supplementary tax. Subsidiaries of US corporations or those from non-minimum tax countries must also be subject to the Swiss supplementary tax. However, the uneven international implementation has a negative impact on the attractiveness of Switzerland and its companies. For Switzerland, the OECD minimum tax is a locational disadvantage. Nevertheless, it is not expedient to opt out of the minimum tax. Withdrawal would mainly result in Swiss corporations having to pay their supplementary tax in foreign countries instead of in Switzerland. If Switzerland wants to maintain its economic success and the lucrative tax revenues from international companies, it must break new ground in order to remain attractive for high value-added functions.
In the area of taxation, Switzerland should now examine as quickly as possible whether and how it can use the new substance-based tax incentives to its advantage. The tax incentives could help to strengthen the country’s attractiveness as a business location. However, the toolbox of a successful canton should also include internationally permissible financial incentives. In addition to substance-based tax incentives, these include Qualified Refundable Tax Credits (QRTC), which are explicitly permitted under OECD minimum tax rules and successfully used by competing countries such as Singapore.
Switzerland’s goal should be to remain one of the three most attractive locations globally for high value-added functions, even with the minimum tax.
Economics Department
Bilateral Relations between Switzerland and the EU
The “Bilateral III” package of agreements aims to stabilize and further develop relations between Switzerland and the EU. The consultation process was completed at the end of October 2025, and the message to Parliament is expected to follow in the first half of 2026. SwissHoldings supports the Federal Council’s efforts to secure long-term access to the EU single market, but emphasizes the need to preserve Switzerland’s economic sovereignty and to carefully examine integration policy issues.
Contents
The “Bilateral III” package of agreements is intended to stabilize and further develop relations between Switzerland and the EU. It includes updates to existing agreements (e.g., free movement of persons, air transport, MRA) as well as new agreements on electricity, food safety, and health. At the same time, the new agreements also implement the clarification of the institutional framework demanded by the EU. A package approach was chosen for this purpose. Instead of regulating institutional issues comprehensively in a horizontal agreement, they are to be resolved individually in each agreement, i.e., on a sector-specific basis.
State
The consultation period for the negotiated agreement package ended on October 31, 2025; SwissHoldings submitted a statement.
Outlook
The Federal Council is currently finalizing its message on the treaty package. It is expected to be submitted to Parliament in the first half of 2026.
Position
SwissHoldings welcomes the Federal Council’s efforts to put the existing relations on a solid and lasting footing based on a new package of agreements with the EU (“Bilateral III”). Stable, reliable, and non-discriminatory relations with the EU, Switzerland’s most important trading partner, are of central importance. The bilateral agreements are a proven instrument for securing market access and strengthening Switzerland’s international competitiveness. However, the new package also entails significant institutional changes, particularly with regard to the dynamic adoption of EU law and the involvement of the ECJ in the dispute settlement mechanism. While these offer companies legal stability and greater predictability, they also raise questions of integration policy and economics. It is therefore necessary to examine the scope Switzerland will retain in future regulations and the extent to which its economic sovereignty will be preserved. The goal must be non-discriminatory market access and a reliable legal framework for internationally active companies. SwissHoldings will actively participate in the consultation process to ensure that the package strengthens the competitiveness of Switzerland as a business location and contributes to economic prosperity. At the same time, integration policy aspects such as the dynamic adoption of legislation and the role of the ECJ must be carefully examined in terms of their impact on economic policy leeway.
Free Trade Agreement
↺ Updated information is available here.
Free trade agreements (FTAs) are a key instrument for export-oriented Switzerland to diversify its trade relations. The network of these agreements is constantly being developed. Particularly noteworthy are the comprehensive EFTA-India Agreement (TEPA), which entered into force on October 1, 2025, the EFTA-MERCOSUR Agreement, which was signed on September 16, 2025, and the adoption of the dispatch on the Economic Partnership Agreement between the EFTA states and Malaysia. In addition, Switzerland and the US agreed on a memorandum of understanding for a trade and customs agreement at the end of 2025. A binding agreement is currently being negotiated. SwissHoldings supports the consistent expansion and modernization of Switzerland’s network of agreements.
Contents
The strongly export-oriented Swiss economy relies not only on trade relations with the EU but also on a broad network of free trade agreements. Switzerland currently has 35 free trade agreements with 45 partners, and new agreements are constantly being concluded, signed, and brought into force.
State
Switzerland continues to pursue its active free trade policy consistently and is steadily expanding its network of international economic agreements. Three milestones are particularly noteworthy in this regard: the comprehensive EFTA-India Agreement (TEPA), which entered into force on October 1, 2025; the EFTA-MERCOSUR Agreement, which was signed on September 16, 2025; and the Economic Partnership Agreement between the EFTA states and Malaysia, on which the Federal Council adopted a dispatch at the end of January. Both agreements significantly expand market access for Swiss companies, strengthen investment protection, and create new opportunities in trade in goods and services.
At the end of 2025, the US and Switzerland agreed on a memorandum of understanding for a trade and customs agreement, reducing additional US tariffs on Swiss products to a maximum of 15%. A legally binding trade agreement is currently being negotiated but has not yet been concluded.
Outlook
Switzerland is continuing its strategy of diversifying its trade relations. Negotiations are currently underway with Vietnam, and at the same time, modernizations of existing agreements with Chile as well as with Mexico and the South African Customs Union are planned. Furthermore, efforts are being made to modernize the free trade agreement with China.
The EFTA-MERCOSUR agreement is also expected to be submitted by the Federal Council to Parliament for approval this year.
Position
In view of growing global trade conflicts and increasing protectionism, expanding the network of free trade agreements is essential for Switzerland’s export-oriented economy. These agreements not only offer customs advantages, but also legal certainty for companies. The diversification of trade relations strengthens the resilience of the Swiss economy and secures jobs. SwissHoldings therefore supports the continuous expansion and modernization of free trade agreements.
Investment Controls
↺ Updated information is available here.
The bill aims to introduce investment controls in Switzerland. During the last winter session, the National Council and Council of States agreed on a streamlined version that limits the scope of application to foreign state investors. The referendum period runs until April 17, 2026. The revised bill avoids an excessive expansion of the scope of application and additional regulatory costs.
Contents
With the introduction of an investment screening mechanism (23.086), takeovers of domestic companies by foreign investors are only to be reviewed if they jeopardize public order or security in Switzerland. The Federal Council’s streamlined draft prevailed in the parliamentary debate. It provides for a state review only in cases where a Swiss company is active in a particularly critical area and is to be taken over by a state-controlled foreign investor. Such a transaction must also jeopardize public order or security in Switzerland for a review to be necessary at all.
State
After the National Council had debated the bill in September 2024 and called for comprehensive regulation, the Council of States successfully struck down this significant expansion in the 2025 fall session. The Council of States thus limited the scope of application to foreign state investors. In the 2025 winter session, the National Council followed the Council of States’ leaner version. The bill was adopted in the final vote.
Outlook
The referendum period runs until April 17, 2026.
Position
Foreign direct investment is of central importance to Switzerland, as it significantly promotes prosperity and competitiveness in our small and open economy. In Switzerland’s small and open economy, the prosperity of the population and the competitiveness of companies depend directly on their integration into global value chains. As Swiss companies themselves are among the largest direct investors abroad, Switzerland has a particular interest in ensuring that access to international investment markets is as non-discriminatory and transparent as possible. The Federal Council considers the existing legal framework to be sufficient, and SwissHoldings supports this position. With the revised bill, the Investment Screening Act follows the Federal Council’s streamlined approach; an excessive expansion of the scope of application and additional regulatory costs have been avoided. This preserves openness to foreign investment as a key success factor for Switzerland as a business location.
Investment Protection Agreements
↺ Updated information is available here.
Switzerland has one of the world’s largest networks of bilateral investment protection agreements (IPAs). Investment protection agreements create reliable framework conditions for Swiss foreign investments. Since a change in practice by the Federal Council, IPAs are subject to an optional referendum. In December 2025, the Federal Council adopted the dispatch on the new investment protection agreement with Chile. Following the ISA with Indonesia, this is the second agreement based on Switzerland’s new negotiating approach. SwissHoldings welcomes the further development of the IPA instrument.
Contents
Switzerland has a network of more than 110 bilateral investment protection agreements. According to UNCTAD, this makes Switzerland the third largest network of such agreements worldwide after Germany and China. By concluding IPAs, Switzerland is improving the framework conditions for investment and strengthening its attractiveness as a business location. Due to a change in practice by the Federal Council, IPAs are now subject to the optional referendum on international treaties, in addition to free trade agreements.
State
On December 5, 2025, the Federal Council adopted the dispatch to the Federal Assembly on the new investment agreement between Switzerland and Chile. The agreement replaces and updates the agreement between the two countries that has been in force since 2002. Following the IPA with Indonesia, which entered into force in August 2024, this agreement is Switzerland’s second ISA based on the new negotiating approach.
Outlook
SECO is continuously working to evaluate the network of Swiss investment protection agreements and expand it as necessary.
Position
Direct investment is crucial for Switzerland: in a small, open economy, the prosperity and competitiveness of companies depend heavily on global networking. Investment promotion and protection agreements are essential, as foreign investment is subject to political as well as economic risks. Effective investment protection requires an investor-state dispute settlement mechanism. These procedures have proven their worth for Switzerland and its companies, as they build on existing international structures (ICSID, UNCITRAL) and enable objective, politically independent dispute resolution. SwissHoldings supports the further development of these mechanisms to increase legal certainty and protect against abuse.
Corporate Responsibility
↺ Updated information is available here.
The EU has amended its sustainability regulations with the adoption of the “Simplification Omnibus” package. In September 2025, the Federal Council decided to counter the new Responsible Business Initiative with an indirect counterproposal. This is to be coordinated internationally. The Federal Council plans to open the consultation process on the counterproposal by the end of March. SwissHoldings welcomes this approach in principle: sustainability should be strengthened – but with internationally coordinated, practical solutions rather than special national rules.
Contents
Developments worldwide, but especially in the EU, have progressed rapidly in recent years in the areas of non-financial reporting and due diligence obligations. As part of its Green Deal, the EU has adopted numerous regulations in order to take on a global pioneering role. This development was halted with the “Simplification Omnibus” package proposed in February 2025. The adoption of the package in the trilogue process instead provides for significant simplifications in due diligence and reporting obligations, the removal of harmonized, uniform civil liability rules at EU level, and a delay in implementation. The Federal Council is currently examining the extent to which it wishes to adopt the regulatory approaches adopted by the EU for Switzerland.
State
At the end of March 2025, the Federal Council spoke out in favor of an internationally coordinated approach to sustainability regulation. Specifically, it said it would wait for regulatory developments in the EU before considering further adjustments to Swiss law. On September 3, 2025, the Federal Council also decided to counter the newly submitted Responsible Business Initiative with an indirect counterproposal. The counterproposal is to be based on current regulatory developments in the EU.
Outlook
The Federal Council plans to open the consultation process on the draft counterproposal by the end of March.
Position
With its decision, the Federal Council is sending the right signal: sustainability should be further strengthened – but not through special national rules, but in close step with international developments. In the current economic situation, additional regulations would be unsustainable for companies. Switzerland already has high standards in place: companies are subject to comprehensive reporting requirements on environmental, human rights, and social risks. This regulatory framework is internationally compatible and complies with current international standards.
While the EU is currently deregulating in several areas, the new Responsible Business Initiative calls for unrealistic special rules. It ignores existing standards and demands liability mechanisms that are unknown internationally – an economically and politically counterproductive solo effort. Instead, the Federal Council is focusing on international coordination: sustainability should be promoted, but with practical, coordinated solutions rather than isolated Swiss regulations.
Collective Legal Protection
↺ Updated information is available here.
The class action bill (21.082) has been rejected by the National Council and the Council of States. Instead, the Council of States has referred postulate 25.3954, which instructs the Federal Council to examine whether existing conciliation and ombudsman procedures can serve as an effective alternative to the expansion of class actions. The Federal Council’s report is expected in the coming months. SwissHoldings supports the pragmatic approach of the postulate.
Contents
Last fall, Switzerland decided not to introduce any new civil law instruments for collective legal protection, such as class actions. The National Council and Council of States did not consider the Federal Council’s draft bill, which means that the proposal has definitively failed. Instead, according to the postulate, it should be examined whether existing conciliation and ombudsman procedures can serve as an effective alternative to the expansion of class action lawsuits. Such procedures already lead to a quick and cost-effective settlement in up to 80% of cases.
State
The Council of States referred postulate 25.3954 on the expansion of existing conciliation and ombudsman procedures to the Federal Council during the winter session.
Outlook
The Federal Council’s report is expected to be published in the coming months.
Position
SwissHoldings supports the thrust of the postulate. The question of effective solutions for mass claims has been the subject of research for decades. This research consistently shows that out-of-court dispute resolution and ombudsman services are faster, more efficient, and less costly than class actions in court. Against this backdrop, ombudsman services are becoming increasingly important as an alternative. Countries such as the United Kingdom and Belgium in particular have developed highly efficient, integrated procedures, in some cases using digital and AI-supported applications. Empirical studies show that ombudsman procedures enable high compensation payments to be made more quickly and cheaply, promote responsible corporate behavior, and avoid lengthy court proceedings. Switzerland already has established ombudsman services in several sectors and thus has a solid starting point. The key challenge remains the nationwide expansion of such models, in particular by involving SMEs and replacing less effective arbitration procedures with modern ombudsman systems.
IFRS Standards
↺ Updated information is available here.
The IFRS Foundation develops global accounting standards and supervises the IASB, which sets financial standards, and the ISSB, which focuses on sustainability standards. The IASB has finalized and published the amendments to IFRS 19. The project on regulatory business activities is continuing. The next IASB agenda consultation is scheduled to take place from 2027. SwissHoldings is actively involved in these developments by submitting detailed comments.
Contents
The IFRS Foundation is a non-profit foundation. Its objective is to develop high-quality global accounting standards, promote the use and application of these standards, and bring about convergence of national accounting regulations with these standards. The Foundation oversees the work of both the IASB (the board that issues financial standards) and the ISSB (the board that issues non-financial standards).
State
The ISSB focuses on supporting the implementation of international sustainability standards and has launched new research projects on biodiversity, human rights, and human capital. For its part, the IASB has now finalized and published the amendments to IFRS 19. The project on regulatory business activities is continuing, although the timetable for a possible new standard is still open. The next IASB agenda consultation is scheduled to take place from 2027 onwards and will be coordinated with the ISSB in terms of content.
Outlook
The ISSB and the IASB are driving forward important projects for the further development of global standards.
Position
The detailed positions are set out in the association’s corresponding statements.
Financial Location Switzerland
↺ Updated information is available here.
In response to the CS crisis, the Federal Council presented a package of measures in June 2025 to strengthen the stability of Switzerland as a financial center. The first two consultations on the package have already been conducted. SwissHoldings participated in both with statements. Two more will follow in the course of the year. From SwissHoldings’ point of view, regulation is needed that strengthens stability without tightening financing conditions for companies.
Contents
With its package of measures to strengthen financial market stability, the Federal Council is learning lessons from the CS crisis. The proposals include amendments at the legislative and ordinance level and are divided into four consultations until 2026. They concern, among other things, capital requirements, liquidity provision, corporate governance, and supervision.
State
On June 14, 2025, the Federal Council presented the key parameters. Two consultations have already been conducted. The first concerned the amendment to the Capital Adequacy Ordinance and lasted until September 2025. The second related to amendments to the Banking Act and the Capital Adequacy Ordinance and ended on January 9, 2025. SwissHoldings participated in both procedures by submitting a statement.
Outlook
Two further consultations will follow in the course of the year.
Position
In principle, the members of SwissHoldings are not directly affected by the Federal Council’s regulatory measures to strengthen the stability of the Swiss banking sector, as the association does not represent any banks or insurance companies. Nevertheless, the proposed package of measures is also highly relevant for our members: Due to the potentially high real economic costs of a banking crisis, SwissHoldings members have an interest in regulation that largely prevents such crises. However, our members are also dependent on financial services that can only be provided by internationally competitive banks. For Switzerland, with its highly networked international economy, an internationally significant financial center is a decisive competitive advantage. Fundamentally, at least one major international bank is needed so that the numerous globally oriented companies can conduct their business via the Swiss financial center. Such a globally networked financial center is also an important prerequisite for maintaining the strength of the Swiss franc, which in turn guarantees generally low interest rates and thus low financing costs for companies.
From SwissHoldings’ point of view, the impact on the real economy should be systematically taken into account when designing new regulatory approaches. Regulation is needed that creates stability in the financial system without unnecessarily tightening financing conditions for companies. The new regulatory requirements must not lead to restrictions on lending to companies or make it more expensive. Banks must continue to have the flexibility to meet the international and complex financing needs of large industrial companies, for example in infrastructure, export, or innovation projects. Last but not least, regulation must not lead to restrictions in operational financial management, for example through restrictions on cash pooling, higher fees, or reduced transaction security in international payments.
It is also essential that the planned legislative changes focus on systemically important banks. Any extension to other large companies – within or outside the financial sector – must be strictly avoided.
