GBAF Logo
Global Banking & Finance Awards® 2026 Nominations open, free to enter Nominate now →
UBS capital rules have Swiss stuck between a rock and a hard place - Finance news and analysis from Global Banking & Finance Review
Finance

UBS capital rules have Swiss stuck between a rock and a hard place

Published by Global Banking & Finance Review

Posted on October 19, 2026

4 min read

· Last updated: October 19, 2026

Add as preferred source on Google

Swiss Banks Face Stricter UBS Capital Rules Amid Political Uncertainty

Swiss Lawmakers Debate New Capital Requirements for UBS

By Dave Graham and Ariane Luthi

ZURICH, Oct 19 (Reuters) - Swiss lawmakers face a quandary as they craft new capital rules for UBS following the 2023 collapse of Credit Suisse: too strict and Switzerland's biggest bank might move abroad, too lax and a potential referendum could prolong the uncertainty.

A lower house committee will on October 26 begin debating banking rules passed last month by the Swiss upper house of parliament that management at UBS suggested were intolerable.

Prospects for lighter touch rules emerging appear slim.

Major investors have urged UBS to leave Switzerland in search of friendlier regulation, and the bank is drafting potential contingency plans including shifting its headquarters or merging with another lender, sources told Reuters.

Yet the cost of leaving or loss of its Swiss identity might be a price the Zurich-based wealth manager is unwilling to pay.

Leo Mueller, a Centre Party lawmaker on the committee, said parliament was in a tricky situation.

"If we water it down too much, there'll be a referendum. Then there's a risk people say 'it's not enough', it gets rejected and we end up with nothing at all," he said.

"If we're too strict, the bank could say, 'Well, Switzerland is now a tough place to do business, we'll look elsewhere.'"

Compromises are circulating, with some lawmakers working to temper the proposals, but the view across the political spectrum is that any softening will be challenging.

Referendum Threat Looms Over UBS Capital Rules

REFERENDUM THREAT

Proposed CET1 Capital Requirements

The upper house decided UBS should back its foreign units with 90% Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) capital, up from a current 60% buffer that can be partly met with cheaper capital. The government proposed a 100% CET1 requirement.

UBS has repeatedly said it wants to remain in Switzerland and that its presence there is beneficial to both the bank and the country. However, it argues the 90% CET1 proposal is excessive and would damage its competitiveness.

Political and Shareholder Reactions

Finance Minister Karin Keller-Sutter, who has hinted at the possibility of a public referendum, in which a law can be challenged with enough support, wants parliament to sign off on the 90% CET1 target, a person familiar with the matter said.

Her ministry declined to comment.

The Social Democrats, who favour 100% CET1 capital, say they will decide whether to seek a referendum once parliament has made its choice, which is not expected before December at the earliest.

Some shareholders say the proposed rules could suffocate UBS. Artisan Partners has publicly urged it to quit Switzerland over the regulations.

Alternative Proposals and Compromises

Hans-Peter Portmann of the centre-right Liberal Party, or FDP, has floated a 75% CET1 capital requirement for UBS' foreign units, combined with a mechanism to bolster its loss-absorbing capacity if capital ratios go below a certain level.

"A solution will be found that enables UBS to keep compensating shareholders for risk appropriately and to set aside investment capital for the future, while minimizing the default risk for the Swiss public as far as possible," he said.

Other proposals are likely to surface ahead of the full lower house debate expected in December.

Tougher Line Expected in Parliament

TOUGHER LINE

Upper House Support and Lower House Dynamics

Upper house support for the 90% CET1 proposal was stronger than expected.

In the lower house, left-of-centre parties are better represented and those on the centre and centre-right are either split or leaning towards a firmer line, people within parliament told Reuters.

Potential Outcomes and Expert Opinions

"My personal view is the lower house could settle on 90%," said FDP lawmaker Olivier Feller, who supports 100% CET1 backing of UBS' foreign units but said his party's stance was still under discussion. "We're a small country with a large bank."

Urs Saxer, a University of Zurich law professor, said any compromise would likely end up close to the 90% CET1 proposal.

"UBS will not act irrationally," he said. "One would need a very good reason to leave, and the stability and legal certainty Switzerland offer are not easy to find nowadays."

(Reporting by Dave Graham and Ariane Luthi; Additional reporting by Oliver Hirt; Editing by Alexander Smith)

Key Takeaways

  • UBS warns that a 90% CET1 requirement for foreign subsidiaries would impose roughly USD 16 billion in extra capital, potentially jeopardizing its competitiveness. (ubs.com)
  • Major investor Artisan Partners has publicly urged UBS to leave Switzerland, calling the proposed rules “punitive” and damaging to shareholder value. (live.euronext.com)
  • Swiss lawmakers face a balancing act: too strict and risk losing UBS, too lenient and risk triggering a referendum that could nullify reform entirely. (ubs.com)

References

Frequently Asked Questions

Why are Swiss lawmakers considering stricter capital rules for UBS?
In response to Credit Suisse's 2023 collapse, Swiss lawmakers are reassessing UBS's capital requirements to enhance banking sector stability and public confidence.
What are the proposed CET1 capital requirements for UBS?
The upper house proposed a 90% CET1 capital backing for UBS’s foreign units, up from the current 60%, while some parties advocate for 100%.
How could strict capital rules impact UBS?
If rules are too strict, UBS may consider relocating its headquarters or merging with another lender to remain competitive.
What risks do lawmakers face in setting UBS’s capital rules?
If rules are too lax, a public referendum could be triggered, while stricter rules risk UBS leaving Switzerland or reducing its operations.
Has UBS indicated plans to leave Switzerland?
UBS has drafted contingency plans and faced investor pressure to leave, but states remaining in Switzerland is beneficial for both the bank and the country.

Tags

Related Articles

More from Finance

Explore more articles in the Finance category