As of: April, 9 2025
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 draft for a Federal Act on the Transparency of Legal Entities aims to further strengthen the integrity of Switzerland as a financial and business center. This includes the creation of a federal register of beneficial owners as well as other targeted measures to make the fight against money laundering and economic crime more effective. The proposed amendments are intended to comply with international standards. The bill is currently in the parliamentary process. SwissHoldings generally welcomes the proposal but sees a need for adjustment in the scope of application. Listed companies and their subsidiaries must be exempted.
Contents
The bill has two main objectives: On one hand, it aims to increase the transparency of legal entities to enable authorities to identify beneficial owners more efficiently. For this purpose, a federal register of beneficial owners is to be introduced (Draft 1). On the other hand, certain advisory activities will in future be subject to the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) with corresponding due diligence obligations (Draft 2) to improve effectiveness in the fight against money laundering. The proposed measures are intended to comply with the international standards of the Financial Action Task Force and the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes.
State
On 22 May 2024, the Federal Council adopted the dispatch on strengthening anti-money laundering (see press release). The Legal Affairs Committee of the Council of States (LAC-S) decided in autumn 2024 to split the draft for separate discussions. This division was subsequently supported by both the Legal Affairs Committee of the National Council (LAC-N) and the co-report of the Economic Affairs and Taxation Committee of the National Council (EATC-N).
Draft 1 – Transparency Register:
The Council of States approved the draft on 18 December. The LAC-N entered into deliberation on 17 January 2025. The EATC-N deviates from the Council of States in two aspects in its co-report: it proposes removing the obligation for financial intermediaries to report discrepancies in the register (Art. 38) and opposes the provision requiring legal entities to report discrepancies (Art. 39a). It recommends that the LAC-N approve the draft with the proposed amendments in the final vote.
Draft 2 – Partial Revision of the AMLA:
Draft 2 was discussed in the LAC-S on 3/4 April 2025. The committee supports extending due diligence obligations under the AMLA to consultants. Detailed deliberations will continue in the LAC-S.
Outlook
Draft 1 – Transparency Register:
The LAC-N is expected to resume detailed deliberations on Draft 1 on 10/11 April 2025, addressing proposals from the EATC-N co-report.
Draft 2 – Partial Revision of the AMLA:
The LAC-S is expected to conclude detailed deliberations on 15 May 2025, to submit its proposals to the Council of States for the summer session.
Position
SwissHoldings generally supports the consideration of the draft. With the upcoming FATF country review in 2027, our association views the separation of the draft into two parts critically. While we have accepted this separation, we emphasize that parliamentary deliberation on Draft 2 must be completed in time for the FATF review to avoid weakening Switzerland’s business environment. One key area requiring amendment:
- Complete exemptions for listed companies and their subsidiaries: The association advocates for full exemptions for listed companies and their subsidiaries. Inclusion in the register is unnecessary, as robust reporting and disclosure obligations already apply to shareholders and beneficial owners, triggered at a threshold of 3% of share capital or voting rights. In addition, financial reporting and disclosure standards applicable to listed companies on the SIX Swiss Exchange already require disclosure of subsidiaries, thereby ensuring sufficient transparency.
Revision of the Financial Market Infrastructure Act (FMIA)
↺ Updated information is available here.
The Financial Market Infrastructure Act (FMIA) is undergoing a regular and general review. A report by the Federal Department of Finance (FDF) shows that the act has proven effective in most areas. Nevertheless, there is a need to enhance transparency and legal certainty in specific regulatory areas. A consultation was conducted in 2024, and the dispatch is expected in early 2026. SwissHoldings generally supports improvements in derivatives regulation but firmly rejects any weakening of self-regulation.
Contents
The FMIA governs the licensing and duties of financial market infrastructures, as well as the conduct obligations of financial market participants in the trading of securities and derivatives. Even before the law entered into force in January 2016, the Federal Council had announced that the FDF would subject it to a general review and prepare a report. This report concludes that the FMIA has mostly proven effective. However, further enhancements to transparency and legal certainty in specific regulatory areas are necessary. Additionally, the Federal Council decided to implement the reporting obligation for small non-financial counterparties regarding derivative transactions as of 1 January 2028.
State
A consultation was held from June to October 2024. SwissHoldings submitted its response on 4 October 2024. The FDF is currently evaluating the consultation feedback, but has postponed the matter.
Outlook
According to authorities, the dispatch on the FMIA revision is expected to be published in early 2026.
Position
The proposed adjustments in derivatives regulation represent an improvement and are therefore welcome. However, we strongly oppose the shift of ad hoc disclosures of shareholdings from self-regulation to state regulation under FINMA oversight. Self-regulation has proven effective and should not be abandoned without necessity but maintained as a competitive advantage. SwissHoldings has aligned its position accordingly.
Amendment of the Cartel Act: Material Partial Revision
↺ Updated information is available here.
On 24 May 2023, the Federal Council adopted the dispatch on the partial revision of the Cartel Act (23.047). The aim of the revision is to modernize Swiss merger control and align it with international standards. It also seeks to strengthen private antitrust law and improve the practicality of the opposition procedure. The Council of States completed its deliberations in the second quarter of 2024. The Economic Affairs and Taxation Committee of the National Council (EATC-N) concluded its deliberations and final vote on the draft on 31 March 2025. The draft will likely be debated in the National Council during the summer session. SwissHoldings explicitly welcomes the inclusion of the long-demanded institutional reform as part of the revision.
Contents
The draft introduces a change from the qualified market dominance test to the Significant Impediment to Effective Competition (SIEC) test, aligning the Swiss Competition Commission (COMCO) more closely with international practices. Another component of the legislative change is the strengthening of private antitrust enforcement, particularly by expanding standing to sue. In addition, the opposition procedure is to be improved by eliminating the risk of direct sanctions if no investigation is opened within the shortened time frame. Key discussion points in the partial revision include the provisions on anticompetitive agreements (Art. 5 CartA) and the conduct of dominant undertakings (Art. 7 CartA).
The preliminary draft included a proposal to implement Motion 18.4282 Français, adopted in June 2021, which considers both qualitative and quantitative criteria. It also incorporates provisions on the principle of investigation, presumption of innocence, and burden of proof, as demanded by Motion 21.4189 Wicki. More information can be found in the press release and the consultation documents.
State
The Council of States deliberated on the draft during the summer session of 2024 and rejected the obligation of the competition authorities to demonstrate actual harm. The EATC-N began its deliberations on 8 October 2024. Following the final vote on 31 March 2025, the majority of the EATC-N proposed new language for Art. 5 para. 1bis and Art. 7 para. 3 CartA: the competition authorities should assess the permissibility of competition restraints on a case-by-case basis using practical experience and the specific circumstances in the relevant market.
These proposals suggest a divergence from the position of the Council of States.
Outlook
The National Council is expected to debate the draft during the summer session (2–20 June 2025).
Position
SwissHoldings expects strict implementation of the Français and Wicki motions. Both motions require authorities and courts to assess the actual effects of an agreement or conduct and to demonstrate its harm to competition. The EATC-S proposal meets these expectations and also introduces the requested compliance defense (see SwissHoldings position paper submitted to the EATC-S). In contrast, the Council of States rejects the notion that the competition authority must assess the specific effects of an agreement or conduct in each case. The EATC-N, however, shows a willingness to reintroduce the case-by-case approach.
Amendment of the Cartel Act: Institutional reform
↺ Updated information is available here.
As part of the material revision of the Cartel Act, the reform of the competition authorities is being addressed in a separate procedure, as requested by several stakeholders during the consultation. This approach aims to ensure that the material revision of the Cartel Act does not fail again. The expert committee has developed more specific implementation proposals for the institutional reform. Based on the final report of the expert committee, the Federal Council mandated the Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research (EAER) to present a consultation draft by mid-2025. SwissHoldings supports a critical review and in-depth examination of the institutional reform and advocates for a clear separation between investigative and decision-making bodies.
Contents
Parallel to the ongoing substantive revision of the Cartel Act, the Federal Council is advancing a separate reform of the competition authorities (hereinafter: institutional reform). This is being addressed independently. The approach is based on the lessons learned from the failure of the 2012 Cartel Act revision, which was twice rejected by the National Council. The institutional reform aims to address problems in administrative proceedings, particularly by separating the investigation and decision-making authorities.
To develop the reform proposals, the Federal Council appointed an independent expert committee. The final report, chaired by former Federal Supreme Court judge Hansjörg Seiler, concluded that COMCO generally functions well and does not show deficiencies from a rule-of-law perspective. A systemic overhaul is therefore not warranted. However, the separation should be implemented more effectively, with the Secretariat conducting investigations entirely independently from COMCO, which would remain a part-time body. Furthermore, the possibility of appointing a procedural officer to support COMCO is under examination. The Federal Council has, in a first step, followed the expert committee’s recommendations in full.
Sidebar: Despite the Federal Council’s ongoing efforts to reform the competition authorities, the Council of States adopted Motion 23.3224 Français “Institutional reform of the competition authority” and Motion 22.4404 Rechsteiner “Accelerate proceedings. Increase legal certainty” on 17 March 2025. This expresses the Council of States’ determination to address both the institutional separation between investigative and decision-making bodies and the issue of procedural duration. The National Council had already adopted Rechsteiner’s Motion 22.4404 during the spring session of the previous year. The Federal Council is now required to submit a concrete implementation proposal.
State
An independent commission of experts was established to make proposals for implementation. The final report by the commission of experts chaired by former federal judge Hansjörg Seiler, concluded that COMCO functions well overall and does not exhibit any constitutional deficiencies. A change in the system was therefore not deemed necessary. Despite the work already initiated by the Federal Council regarding the reform of the competition authorities, on November 14, 2024, the WAK-S supported the concerns raised in Motion 23.3224 Français, “Institutional Reform of the Competition Authority,” and therefore requested its adoption. In particular, the WAK-S expressed its desire to address the issue of the institutional separation between the investigating and deciding authorities, as well as the issue of the duration of proceedings.
Outlook
On 15 March 2024, based on the final report, the Federal Council mandated the EAER to present a consultation draft for the reform by mid-2025. Following the Council of States’ approval on 17 March 2025, the Economic Affairs and Taxation Committee of the National Council (EATC-N) also adopted Motion 23.3224 Français (Wicki) on 1 April 2025.
Position
SwissHoldings welcomes the fact that the long-requested institutional reform is now being pursued in parallel with the ongoing revision of the substantive Cartel Act and supports the critical and thorough review of this reform. However, it remains to be seen whether maintaining the current system is advisable. SwissHoldings will position itself accordingly during the consultation and advocates for a separation between the investigative and decision-making bodies. SwissHoldings therefore supports Motion 23.3224 Français and welcomes the clear signals from the Council of States on 17 March 2025 and from the EATC-N on 1 April 2025, both of which approved the motion.
Motion Rüegsegger “Introduce Sector Inquiries. Resolve Structural Competition Issues”
↺ Updated information is available here.
Motion 24.4590 Rüegsegger, submitted on 20 December 2024, calls for the introduction of sector inquiries as a new instrument under the Cartel Act. This would enable the analysis of structural competition problems in specific industries, even in the absence of a concrete suspicion of a violation of competition law. SwissHoldings rejects the motion.
Contents
The introduction of sector inquiries would allow COMCO to proactively analyze markets without needing sufficient suspicion. This instrument aims to help identify and eliminate structural barriers such as market entry restrictions, information asymmetries, or distortions of competition. Proponents argue that incorporating sector inquiries into the Cartel Act would strengthen the competition authorities, promote market transparency, and improve the functioning of competition in the long term. It would also give COMCO the same tools available to EU competition authorities.
The Federal Council believes that this instrument and its potential design should be thoroughly evaluated and subjected to a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis before implementation. In the context of the adopted postulate 23.3444 from the Economic Affairs and Taxation Committee of the National Council (EATC-N), titled “Merger of UBS and CS. Assessment of its competition and economic significance,” the Federal Council is currently assessing the pros and cons of introducing sector inquiries.
State
The motion was submitted on 20 December 2024. On 19 February 2025, the Federal Council recommended rejecting the motion.
Outlook
The Federal Council intends to await the results of the report on postulate 23.3444 before deciding how to proceed with Motion 24.4590 Rüegsegger. The postulate report is expected by the end of 2025.
Position
SwissHoldings rejects Motion Rüegsegger, as COMCO already possesses sufficient tools such as market monitoring, issuing expert opinions, and making recommendations. These existing instruments should be utilized effectively instead.

Taxation Department
OECD/G20 Project on the Taxation of the Digitalized Economy
↺ Updated information is available here.
The OECD digital taxation project consists of two pillars: first, the reallocation of corporate tax revenues to market jurisdictions, and second, the introduction of a global minimum tax. While progress on Pillar 1 has been stalled for some time, many EU countries and Switzerland have already fully or partially implemented Pillar 2. However, since President Trump took office, Pillar 2 also faces significant challenges. Trump has instructed the U.S. to withdraw from the OECD’s digital taxation project. His administration now has 60 days to prepare measures for the President to act against countries that impose discriminatory and extraterritorial taxes against the U.S. Concrete announcements are expected no earlier than the second half of April. U.S. measures are likely to target the removal of the UTPR under Pillar 2 and so-called digital service taxes introduced by other countries. It is unlikely that the global minimum tax will be completely dismantled. EU countries are expected to maintain it and pressure Switzerland to continue its implementation. However, the U.S. position could mean the end of Pillar 1.
International tax competition is likely to intensify in the coming years. The federal and cantonal governments should prepare for these developments and continue with plans to introduce new internationally accepted measures to remain competitive (e.g., QRTCs).
Contents
The OECD project on taxing the digital economy aims to increase the acceptance of international corporate taxation. It is part of the “OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS” (hereinafter: IF), which includes over 140 countries. It is composed of two pillars. Pillar 1 involves reallocating the profits of around 200 of the world’s largest and most profitable companies from their headquarters to market jurisdictions. Pillar 2 entails a 15% global minimum tax on all companies with annual revenues of at least EUR 750 million. In October 2021, IF member states agreed on the policy parameters of both pillars. Since then, work has focused on the technical implementation. Pillar 1 is to be implemented through a multilateral agreement presented for signature and ratification. Pillar 2 is implemented through uniform model rules developed jointly but enacted individually by countries (common approach). In addition to the model rules, there are explanatory commentaries and regularly updated administrative guidance documents.
State
Implementation of Pillar 1 has not advanced beyond OECD-level work. Pillar 2 is much further along; the EU and Switzerland have already implemented the global minimum tax in whole or in part. However, the G20 project has long been facing major difficulties.
Most countries have not implemented the minimum tax. On 20 January 2025, U.S. President Trump announced that the U.S. would withdraw from the digital taxation project and take countermeasures, including new withholding taxes, against countries applying discriminatory and extraterritorial taxes against the U.S. (link to the decree and link to the America First Trade Policy). His administration has 60 days to prepare measures enabling the President to retaliate against countries imposing such taxes (e.g., UTPR or digital service taxes). President Trump also announced plans to reduce the federal corporate income tax rate to 15% for production activities. The U.S. also withdrew from the ongoing UN tax project.
It has long been apparent that G20 countries are engaged in intensifying tax competition to attract high-tech and highly profitable companies. Countries increasingly want to claim these profits entirely for themselves rather than distribute them fairly at a global level. They also resist restrictions on using effective tools such as attractive tax rates. With President Trump, the international battle over research and production locations of major corporations has become overt.
Outlook
The future of international corporate tax law is currently uncertain. President Trump’s announcements could significantly impact the OECD minimum tax and likely spell the end of Pillar 1. Concrete U.S. countermeasures are expected no earlier than the second half of April and may receive support from Congress. It remains unclear which foreign taxes the U.S. will consider discriminatory and extraterritorial, and what exact measures the Trump administration will adopt in relation to the OECD minimum tax. The consequences will also depend on whether the U.S. dismantles the minimum tax entirely or seeks special exemptions to enhance its competitiveness at the expense of (EU) countries maintaining the tax.
Regardless of U.S. developments, political and economic considerations suggest that EU member states will continue to uphold the minimum tax. Key factors include how the OECD responds to U.S. demands and how other major G20 countries like China and India react. There are also questions about the impact of U.S. tariff decisions and their effect on stock markets, which may prompt a more cautious U.S. approach and deter a complete dismantling of the minimum tax.
Trump’s announcement of lower taxes in the U.S. could revive international tax competition. However, it is highly uncertain where this tax cut ranks among Trump’s priorities. The expected revenue shortfall is substantial, posing a major challenge in light of U.S. debt and deficits. U.S. tax policy is primarily determined by Congress, where several senators are skeptical of further increasing the deficit. Given the narrow Republican majority, significant political obstacles could hinder such a tax package. Nonetheless, the corporate tax cut from 35% to 21% during Trump’s first term reportedly yielded positive economic results, which may motivate Trump to pursue further reductions.
Significant changes to the OECD minimum tax are expected in 2025. However, it is unlikely to disappear entirely. Based on statements from EU leaders and institutions, it is expected that the minimum tax will continue as a European project and that the EU will exert strong pressure on Switzerland to follow suit (link to EU Parliament).
Position
There is a risk that adjustments at the OECD level, driven by U.S. or other state pressures, could disadvantage Switzerland. As a successful small economy, Switzerland must strongly defend its interests during the upcoming changes to the OECD minimum tax framework. It must also prepare for contentious and potentially unfair disputes, as demonstrated by the U.S. tariff measures. It is unacceptable for minimum tax rules to be significantly tightened through administrative guidance or for major powers to receive exemptions.
Given the current uncertainty regarding the future of the OECD minimum tax, Switzerland must remain flexible and responsive to changing conditions to preserve its competitiveness. Tax competition is fiercer than ever, and federal and cantonal authorities cannot afford to stand aside.

Economics Department
Bilateral Relations between Switzerland and the EU
At the end of December, the Federal Council announced the conclusion of negotiations with the EU. The new agreement package (“Bilateral Agreements III”) aims to place the relationship between Switzerland and the European Union (EU) on a stable and long-term footing. The agreement texts are currently being initialed. The Federal Council is expected to adopt the dispatch on the agreement package in summer 2025 and initiate the consultation process. Once the final texts and domestic implementation proposals are available, SwissHoldings will conduct a comprehensive assessment.
Contents
Switzerland maintains a dense network of bilateral agreements with the EU. The update of five existing agreements, the conclusion of two new internal market agreements, and enhanced cooperation in research, education, and health are intended to further develop and stabilize the EU-Swiss relationship. However, the EU has linked this development to clarification of the institutional framework. A package approach is being pursued: instead of regulating institutional matters through a single horizontal agreement, each agreement will address institutional issues on a sector-specific basis.
State
On 20 December 2024, the Federal Council announced the material conclusion of negotiations on Bilateral Agreements III. The new package includes updates to existing internal market agreements (e.g., on free movement of persons, air and land transport, and mutual recognition of conformity assessments) and new agreements on electricity, food safety, research, and health.
Outlook
The Federal Council plans to adopt the dispatch on the agreement package before the summer recess in 2025 and to open the consultation process. Parliamentary deliberations are expected to begin in early 2026.
Position
SwissHoldings welcomes the Federal Council’s efforts to place the existing EU-Swiss relationship on a solid and sustainable basis through a new agreement package (“Bilateral Agreements III”). The bilateral agreements have proven beneficial for both sides. The successful conclusion of the negotiation package would directly benefit SwissHoldings member companies in multiple ways: it would consolidate and expand existing market access agreements and allow the conclusion of new ones.
The dynamic adoption of evolving EU law, combined with the establishment of an institutional dispute resolution mechanism, creates reliable and predictable framework conditions for Swiss companies. However, it may also entail further steps towards EU integration. SwissHoldings emphasizes the importance of in-depth scenario analyses to assess the long-term implications for Swiss economic policy. Additionally, the financing of increasing cohesion payments to the EU must be clarified in light of the already strained budget situation. Any assessment of the agreement package must take into account the necessary domestic political concessions.
Free Trade Agreement
↺ Updated information is available here.
The Swiss economy is highly internationalized and engages in extensive cross-border trade and investment activities. A core focus of Swiss foreign economic policy is to improve access to foreign markets, including through free trade agreements (FTAs). The Federal Council is currently negotiating several new agreements and modernizing existing ones. Parliament approved the FTA with India during the last spring session. SwissHoldings supports the ongoing expansion and modernization of FTAs.
Contents
In addition to its trade relations with the EU, Switzerland’s export-oriented economy relies on a broad network of FTAs. Currently, Switzerland has 33 FTAs with 43 partners. This network is continuously expanding. Of particular note is the FTA with India, signed on 10 March 2024 after 16 years of negotiations – a major milestone in Swiss trade policy. In January 2025, agreements with Thailand and Kosovo followed during the World Economic Forum in Davos. These treaties support the diversification of Swiss trade relations in an increasingly challenging geopolitical environment. Furthermore, China and Switzerland have agreed to start discussions on expanding their existing FTA.
State
After the EFTA-India FTA was signed on 20 March 2024, both the Council of States and the National Council approved the agreement.
Outlook
Switzerland continues its strategy of diversifying trade relations. Current negotiations include talks with Vietnam, Malaysia, and the Mercosur bloc. Modernizations of existing FTAs with Chile, Mexico, and the Southern African Customs Union are also planned. Additionally, an update of the FTA with China is being pursued. If no referendum is launched and India’s ratification proceeds as expected, the FTA with India is likely to enter into force in autumn 2025.
Position
In light of growing global trade tensions and increasing protectionism, expanding Switzerland’s network of FTAs is essential for its export-oriented economy. These agreements not only offer tariff advantages but also legal certainty for businesses. Diversifying trade relations strengthens Switzerland’s economic resilience and safeguards jobs. SwissHoldings therefore supports the continuous expansion and modernization of FTAs.
Investment Controls
↺ Updated information is available here.
The introduction of investment screening remains controversial: despite criticism from the Federal Council and the Economic Affairs and Taxation Committee of the Council of States (EATC-S), the Council of States decided to enter into deliberations on the draft during the 2025 spring session. The proposal now returns to the EATC-S for further discussion. From the perspective of the business community, the draft would reduce Switzerland’s attractiveness as a business location and legal certainty, while offering only limited actual benefits.
Contents
The introduction of investment screening would allow the state to block acquisitions of domestic companies by foreign investors if such takeovers pose a threat to public order or security in Switzerland. The draft is particularly aimed at state-controlled investors. According to the EATC-S, the disadvantages of such a measure outweigh its advantages. Switzerland, as a small and open economy, would suffer disproportionately from reduced attractiveness as a business location and diminished legal certainty (see committee’s press release).
State
After the National Council supported stricter investment controls during the 2024 autumn session, the preparatory committee of the Council of States (EATC-S) opposed entering into deliberations in November. However, on 6 March 2025, the Council of States decided, by a vote of 29 to 16, to begin discussions despite the committee’s recommendation.
Outlook
Following the Council of States’ decision to deliberate, the draft returns to the EATC-S for further consultation and revision before the Council of States votes again at a later date.
Position
Foreign direct investment is essential to Switzerland’s prosperity and competitiveness. As a small and open economy, the country heavily depends on integration into global value chains. Given that Swiss companies themselves are among the largest foreign investors, Switzerland has a strong interest in maintaining transparent and non-discriminatory access to international investment markets. This is best achieved by remaining open to foreign investment. The Federal Council considers the current legal framework sufficient. SwissHoldings supports this position. However, the question of whether Switzerland should introduce investment screening cannot be assessed in isolation from international developments. If OECD member countries introduce sweeping restrictions on certain foreign investments, Switzerland’s regulatory approach must take this into account—especially to avoid triggering a negative pull effect on the Swiss economy.
Investment Protection Agreements
SwissHoldings closely monitors developments related to investment protection agreements (IPAs) and emphasizes their great importance for Switzerland as a business location. With over 119 bilateral IPAs, Switzerland possesses the third-largest network of such treaties worldwide—after Germany and China. Due to a change in Federal Council practice, IPAs are now subject to the optional state treaty referendum, in addition to free trade agreements. The first IPA to undergo a consultation process was the new agreement with Indonesia, which entered into force on 1 August 2024. SwissHoldings supports the continued development of the IPA network.
Contents
Switzerland currently has a total of 119 bilateral investment protection agreements. According to UNCTAD, this constitutes the third-largest network worldwide, after Germany and China. By concluding IPAs, Switzerland improves investment conditions and enhances its attractiveness as a business location.
State
Following a change in Federal Council practice, both free trade agreements and IPAs are now subject to the optional state treaty referendum. The first IPA subject to this procedure was the new agreement with Indonesia. The consultation period lasted until 26 September 2022. This agreement fills the legal gap created by the termination of the previous treaty in 2016. The new bilateral investment protection agreement between Switzerland and Indonesia entered into force on 1 August 2024.
Outlook
SECO continuously evaluates Switzerland’s network of IPAs and works to expand it as needed.
Position
Foreign direct investment is crucial for Switzerland: prosperity and corporate competitiveness in this small, open economy are highly dependent on global integration. Investment promotion and protection treaties are essential, given the political and economic risks associated with foreign investments. Effective investment protection requires an investor-state dispute settlement mechanism. Such procedures have proven effective for Switzerland and its companies, as they rely on established international frameworks (ICSID, UNCITRAL) and ensure objective, politically independent dispute resolution. SwissHoldings supports the further development of these mechanisms to enhance legal certainty and guard against misuse.
Corporate Responsibility
↺ Updated information is available here.
At the end of March, the Federal Council announced its support for a coordinated international approach to sustainability regulation. Specifically, it decided to await regulatory developments in the EU before considering further amendments to Swiss law. SwissHoldings explicitly supports this approach. This pragmatic strategy helps avoid a “Swiss Finish” and ensures that Swiss companies are not burdened with excessive or isolated requirements compared to international standards. Additionally, in early January 2025, the association “for greater corporate responsibility” launched a new version of its corporate responsibility initiative.
Contents
Global developments—particularly in the EU—have advanced in recent years both in non-financial reporting and in due diligence obligations, despite significant political debate. As part of its Green Deal, the EU has adopted numerous regulations aimed at positioning itself as a global standard setter. The Federal Council is currently examining whether and how to incorporate these EU regulatory approaches into Swiss law. However, the process is fraught with uncertainties due to recent shifts in EU policy: at the end of February, the European Commission introduced the “Simplification Omnibus,” a package of reforms intended to reduce bureaucracy and ease the burden on companies—potentially saving up to EUR 6.3 billion. The proposed changes include reduced reporting requirements, relaxed liability rules, and delayed implementation timelines. These developments also have implications for Switzerland.
State
At the end of March, the Federal Council decided to pursue a coordinated international approach to sustainability regulation and to await EU developments before proposing changes to Swiss law.
In January 2025, the association “for greater corporate responsibility” launched a new version of its corporate responsibility initiative, which has not yet been formally submitted.
Outlook
The administration has been tasked with developing concrete options for a pragmatic revision of corporate sustainability legislation. These proposals are to cover both sustainability reporting and due diligence obligations. A decision on how to proceed will be made once the EU adopts its revised rules—by spring 2026 at the latest.
Position
SwissHoldings welcomes the Federal Council’s decision. A pragmatic and internationally aligned regulatory approach is the most effective way to promote sustainability in the business sector. Switzerland has had positive experiences with its cautious and practical sustainability model. The current Swiss approach is based on global standards set by the UN and OECD, while also reflecting the unique characteristics of the Swiss economy. Within this framework, companies have already made substantial progress, particularly in transparency and due diligence. According to a federal analysis, around 80% of large companies and 60% of SMEs have implemented relevant measures, including risk analyses on human rights, environmental protection, and corruption.
Collective Legal Protection
↺ Updated information is available here.
During its spring session, the National Council decided by a clear majority not to consider the class action proposal, thereby following the recommendation of its committee. SwissHoldings explicitly welcomes this decision, as it provides legal certainty and continuity. The proposal’s implications for Switzerland as a business location, for our legal tradition, and for our litigation culture are substantial and should not be underestimated. It is now up to the Council of States to stand firm for our economic interests and, as the second chamber, to also reject the draft.
Contents
The Federal Council’s draft proposal on collective legal protection includes an expansion of the existing representative action, the introduction of a new representative action to pursue compensation claims, and the possibility for court-approved settlements to be binding on all parties.
State
During its spring session, the National Council voted by a clear majority not to consider the proposal, following the recommendation of its preparatory committee.
Outlook
Following the National Council’s decision not to consider the draft, the proposal has now been passed to the Council of States. On 4 April, the Legal Affairs Committee of the Council of States (LAC-S) held an initial discussion on the matter. The committee decided to conduct hearings with international experts before beginning formal deliberations. It also commissioned clarifications from the federal administration.
Position
The business community clearly rejects the Federal Council’s draft for expanded representative actions and collective settlements. International experience shows that introducing class actions leads to the emergence and expansion of a professional “litigation industry.” A key driver of this trend is third-party litigation funding (TPLF), in which external investors finance lawsuits, thus encouraging more claims without bearing the associated risks. This is not solely a U.S. phenomenon. The number of class actions in the EU has also risen significantly in recent years, driven by legislative changes and greater access to litigation funding. These concerns are echoed in a study conducted by Sotomo on behalf of economiesuisse and SwissHoldings at the beginning of the year: experts from large companies and SMEs who already have experience with class actions in the U.S. and EU are more aware of the associated risks—and increasingly advocate for Switzerland to refrain from adopting such mechanisms. Particularly the experiences from the most affected EU countries reinforce this position.
From the association’s perspective, there is no reason to replicate these problematic developments in Switzerland. The quality of the Swiss legal system is above average by international standards. Even under current law, individuals can assert claims for mass or scattered damages—including smaller claims. Technological advances, especially in the area of artificial intelligence, are further expanding these possibilities.
IFRS Standards
SwissHoldings closely monitors developments in IFRS standard setting. For its internationally oriented member companies, a globally recognized reporting standard is of central importance. Following the convergence with US GAAP, the pace of IFRS revisions has slowed. At the same time, the IFRS Foundation’s new focus—ESG reporting—has become increasingly significant in the organization’s work.
Contents
The IFRS Foundation is a non-profit organization whose mission is to develop high-quality global accounting standards, promote their use and application, and achieve convergence between national and international accounting frameworks. The Foundation oversees the work of both the IASB (the board responsible for financial reporting standards) and the ISSB (the board responsible for sustainability-related standards).
State
The ISSB is focusing on supporting the implementation of international sustainability standards and has launched new research projects on biodiversity, human rights, and human capital. Another project is examining how to integrate cross-cutting information into financial reports that goes beyond the requirements of IFRS S1 and S2.
In recent months, the IASB has initiated four consultations, including draft amendments to IAS 21, IFRS 19, and IAS 28, as well as practical examples for considering climate-related uncertainties in financial statements.
Outlook
The ISSB and IASB continue to drive key projects for the further development of global standards. The IASB is specifically planning new initiatives to improve the statement of cash flows and to review the rules for amortized cost accounting under IFRS 9.
Position
The detailed positions are shown in the association’s statements (mostly in German).