<h3>I. Überblick</h3>
<p>Der Bundesrat hat am 22. April 2026 die Botschaft zur Revision des Bankengesetzes verabschiedet. Im Zentrum steht eine nach wie vor umstrittene Verschärfung der Eigenmittelanforderungen für systemrelevante Banken: Beteiligungen an im Finanzbereich tätigen Unternehmen mit Sitz im Ausland müssen künftig vollständig mit hartem Eigenkapital unterlegt werden. Damit ignoriert der Bundesrat die von den betroffenen Banken und von Branchenverbänden geäusserten Bedenken: dass solche Vorschriften im internationalen Vergleich übermässig weit gehen und damit schweizerischen Grossbanken einen unnötigen Wettbewerbsnachteil bescheren. Das Parlament wird die Gesetzesvorlage voraussichtlich ab Sommer 2026 beraten. Der vorliegende Beitrag bietet eine kritische Würdigung.</p>
<p>Gleichzeitig hat der Bundesrat die Eigenmittelverordnung (ERV) angepasst. Die Änderungen betreffen unter anderem gewisse Bilanzpositionen wie Software und latente Steueransprüche. Positiv ist, dass der Bundesrat auf eine Änderung der Bestimmungen zum zusätzlichen Eigenkapital (AT1) mit Blick auf sich noch entwickelnde internationale Standards verzichtet hat. Die Verordnungsänderungen treten am 1. Januar 2027 in Kraft.</p>
<p>Nicht Gegenstand der bundesrätlichen Vorlage sind demgegenüber die nicht-kapitalbezogenen, weiteren Massnahmen in den Handlungsfeldern, die im Rahmen des Berichts zur Bankenstabilität vom 10. April 2024 identifiziert wurden.</p>
<h3>II. Ergebnisse der Vernehmlassung</h3>
<p>Das übergeordnete Ziel der Vorlage – die Stärkung der Systemstabilität des Schweizer Finanzplatzes im Nachgang zur Credit Suisse-Krise – wurde in der Vernehmlassung breit unterstützt. Zahlreiche Kantone, politische Parteien und Wirtschaftsverbände anerkennen die grundsätzliche Notwendigkeit regulatorischer Anpassungen.</p>
<p>Gleichzeitig wird die <em>Ausgestaltung</em> der vorgeschlagenen Massnahmen in weiten Teilen als zu weitgehend beurteilt. Die wesentlichen Kritikpunkte lassen sich wie folgt zusammenfassen:</p>
<ul>
<li>Die Massnahme der vollständigen Beteiligungsunterlegung stellt nach Einschätzung zahlreicher Vernehmlassungsteilnehmer eine Überregulierung bzw. einen unverhältnismässigen «Swiss Finish» dar, der die internationale Wettbewerbsfähigkeit des Finanzplatzes beeinträchtigen könnte.</li>
<li>Die Massnahme wird als unverhältnismässig, international nicht abgestimmt und nicht zielführend wahrgenommen.</li>
<li>Es fehle eine ausreichende Regulierungsfolgenabschätzung: Die Kosten-Nutzen-Relation sei nicht systematisch analysiert worden; insbesondere fehlten eine volkswirtschaftliche Gesamtsicht und Transparenz zu den Auswirkungen auf Realwirtschaft, Beschäftigung und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit.</li>
<li>Mehrere Akteure verlangen, die Inkraftsetzung erst nach Abschluss einer vertieften Analyse vorzunehmen, welche insbesondere auch verhältnismässige Alternativlösungen prüft.</li>
<li>Das gestaffelte Vorgehen des Bundesrates – parallele und zeitlich versetzte Vernehmlassungen zu verschiedenen TBTF-Teilpaketen – wird kritisiert, da es keine Gesamtbeurteilung des Massnahmenpakets in einer konsolidierten Vernehmlassung erlaube.</li>
</ul>
<h3>III. Der Bundesrat erkennt die Bedeutung internationaler Wettbewerbsfähigkeit – aber nur selektiv</h3>
<p>Im Rahmen der Anpassung der Eigenmittelverordnung hat der Bundesrat nach der Vernehmlassung offenbar erkannt, wie wichtig die internationale Wettbewerbsfähigkeit des Schweizer Finanzplatzes und der Schweizer Banken sowie ein «level playing field» sind, und dass regulatorische Alleingänge nicht zielführend sind. Entsprechend hat er in verschiedenen Bereichen auf einseitige Verschärfungen verzichtet, z.B.:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>AT1-Instrumente (Art. 27 E-ERV)</strong>: Mehrere Akteure betonten, dass eine enge Orientierung an den internationalen Standards, insbesondere an der EU- und UK-Regulierung, notwendig sei, um die Marktgängigkeit der Instrumente und ihre internationale Vergleichbarkeit sicherzustellen. Rückwirkende Eingriffe würden das Investorenvertrauen beeinträchtigen.</li>
<li><strong>Latente Steueransprüche (DTA)</strong>: Einen vollständigen Abzug latenter Steueransprüche (<em>Deferred Tax Assets</em>, DTA) hätte die Schweiz als einzige bedeutende Jurisdiktion vorgeschrieben. Diese Aktiven seien in der Praxis auch in Stressphasen meist werthaltig und würden international – unter klaren Begrenzungen – anerkannt.</li>
<li><strong>Software:</strong> Der ursprünglich vorgeschlagene Vollabzug von Software vom harten Kernkapital wäre erheblich von den international anerkannten Basel-Standards abgewichen. Selbst die EU ist nach einem früheren Vollabzug wieder zu einem standardisierten Abschreibungsmodell übergegangen, unter anderem aufgrund der strategischen Bedeutung von Software für Banken. Diverse Vernehmlassungsteilnehmer betonten, dass Banken heute technologieintensive Unternehmen seien und Investitionen in Software zentrale Wertschöpfungsbeiträge liefern.</li>
</ul>
<p>Die Bereitschaft des Bundesrates, in diesen Bereichen keinen «Swiss Finish» einzuführen, ist zu begrüssen.</p>
<h3>IV. Vollständige Unterlegung ausländischer Tochtergesellschaften: Problematischer Vorschlag für die Stabilität des Schweizer Finanzplatzes</h3>
<p>Trotz von verschiedenen Seiten geäusserten Kritik plant der Bundesrat weiterhin die Einführung einer 100-prozentigen Unterlegung der Beteiligungen an im Finanzbereich tätigen Unternehmen mit Sitz im Ausland. Die Beteiligungen müssten entsprechend auf Einzelbasis vollständig vom harten Kernkapital abgezogen werden.</p>
<p>Dieser Vorschlag vermag aus unserer Sicht nicht zu überzeugen. Insbesondere wird dadurch das übergeordnete Ziel der Vorlage – die Stärkung der Systemstabilität des Schweizer Finanzplatzes im Nachgang zur Credit Suisse-Krise – unter verschiedenen Gesichtspunkten nicht erreicht:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Kapitalbindung ohne echten Sicherheitsgewinn:</strong> Die vollständige Unterlegung mit CET1-Kapital (statt der bisher teilweisen Anrechnung von AT1-Anleihen) wird von verschiedenen Seiten als sachlich nicht gerechtfertigt kritisiert. Es wird insbesondere argumentiert, dass dies wertvolles Kapital im Schweizer Stammhaus bindet, das dann für das operative Geschäft fehlt. Damit würde nicht nur die unternehmerische Gestaltungsfreiheit, sondern auch die Möglichkeit einer Reaktion einer betroffenen Bank im Falle von unerwarteten oder besorgniserregenden Entwicklungen eingeschränkt.</li>
<li><strong>Wettbewerbsnachteil im internationalen Vergleich (Gold-Plating):</strong> Die Schweiz geht mit der erwähnten Forderung über die internationalen Standards (Basel III) hinaus. Eine international tätige Bank müsste Eigenkapitalanforderungen erfüllen, die zum Teil deutlich höher sind als die ihrer Konkurrenten in den USA oder Europa. Kritiker gehen davon aus, dass dies nicht nur zu einer Belastung des Finanzplatzes führen, sondern auch Finanzdienstleistungen für Unternehmen und PrivatkundInnen verteuern würde.</li>
<li><strong>Verminderte Investorenattraktivität:</strong> Aufgrund der zu erwartenden Auswirkungen auf die Eigenkapitalrendite würde eine Investition in Aktien einer betroffenen Schweizer Bank im Vergleich zur ausländischen Konkurrenz, die keinen vergleichbaren Abzug vornehmen muss, unattraktiver. Institutionelle und private Investoren werden sich bei ansonsten vergleichbarem Risikoprofil tendenziell dem renditestärkeren ausländischen Wettbewerb zuwenden, wodurch sich die Möglichkeiten von schweizerischen Banken, sich im Falle einer Krise durch die Aufnahme von neuem Kapital am Markt zu stabilisieren, vermindern.</li>
</ul>
<h3>V. Ausblick und parlamentarische Beratung</h3>
<p>Das Parlament wird die Vorlage ab Sommer 2026 beraten. Es ist zu hoffen, dass im Rahmen der parlamentarischen Beratung eine ausgewogene Lösung für die Unterlegung ausländischer Tochtergesellschaften gefunden wird, die dem berechtigten Anliegen der Finanzstabilität Rechnung trägt, ohne die Standortattraktivität und wichtige internationale Wettbewerbsfähigkeit der Schweiz als Sitz global tätiger Banken zu gefährden. Immerhin werden die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und Zukunftsfähigkeit des Finanzplatzes Schweiz in Art. 4 des Bundesgesetz über die Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht als Ziel neben der Stärkung des Ansehens explizit genannt.</p>
<p>Die politische Abwägung zwischen Finanzstabilität einerseits und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit des Finanzplatzes andererseits erfordert eine sorgfältige Verhältnismässigkeitsprüfung. Die breite Kritik aus der Vernehmlassung zeigt, dass die Bedenken ernst zu nehmen sind und verhältnismässige Alternativen eine vertiefte Prüfung und weitere Diskussion verdienen.</p>
<p>Für weitere Updates zu den Entwicklungen im Schweizer Bankaufsichtsrecht besuchen Sie den <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/home/regulatory-innovations?utm_source=Bulletin-de&amp;utm_medium=bulletin-04&amp;utm_campaign=bulletin-2026">Homburger Hub Regulatory Innovations</a>.</p>


Homburger Bulletin

Revision des Bankengesetzes: Bundesrat verabschiedet Botschaft

<p>On February 6, 2026, Homburger submitted a consultation statement relating to the Federal Council&#8217;s draft legislation which intends to introduce an enhanced regulatory framework for the issuance of stablecoins and the provision of crypto-related financial services.</p>
<p>While the draft legislation would generally enhance the robsutness of the Swiss regulatory framework, certain amendments will in Homburger&#8217;s view need to be made to maintain and ensure an efficient and appropriate supervisory regime for Swiss market participants. In particular, Swiss licensed banks should in our view be permitted to issue stablecoins with the facilitations under the Federal Anti-Money Laundering Act also applying to regulated banks in the context of the issuance and/or distribution of stablecoins.</p>
<p>Please visit the <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/en/home/regulatory-innovations">Homburger Hub – Regulatory</a> Innovations to read Homburger&#8217;s full consultation statement and receive regular updates on the latest developments under the Swiss financial market laws.</p>


Revision of the Federal Act on Financial Institutions – Homburger Consultation Statement

<h3>FINMA Publishes Guidance on the Risks Associated With the Custody of Cryptobased Assets – Outlook for Regulated Swiss Financial Institutions</h3>
<h3>A. Introduction</h3>
<p>Swiss supervised institutions, such as banks, securities firms, managers of collective assets and portfolio managers, have increasingly extended their service offering to include services relating to cryptobased assets, including cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ether (<strong>Crypto Assets</strong>), in particular in the areas of trading, custody and portfolio management services. The provision of custody and other services relating to Crypto Assets heavily relies on the distributed ledger technology. Crypto Assets and services related thereto are consequently subject to specific technology related operational risks, such as the risk of cyber-attacks or inadequate protection of private keys. In addition, the utilized custody arrangements, in particular if sub-custodians domiciled outside of Switzerland are used, may expose Swiss supervised institutions and their clients to considerable counterparty risks.</p>
<p>In light of the increased activities by Swiss supervised institutions in the area of Crypto Assets and the pertaining risks, on January 12, 2026, the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority FINMA (<strong>FINMA</strong>) published the &#171;FINMA Guidance 01/2026 – Custody of cryptobased assets&#187; (<strong>FINMA Guidance Custody of Crypto Assets</strong>) under which it outlines the regulatory risks discovered in the context of FINMA&#8217;s supervision that are associated with the custody of Crypto Assets and clarifies its regulatory practice with regard to the supervisory operational and credit risk management requirements relating thereto.</p>
<p>In addition to generally stipulating that supervised institutions must adequately address the operational risk resulting from the provision of services related to Crypto Assets by putting in place a robust technical infastructre and sufficient internal expertise, under the FINMA Guidance Custody or Crypto Assets, FINMA specifcally clarifies which measures it expects Swiss supervised institutions to implement to address the concrete risks resulting from custody arrangements relating to Crypto Assets.</p>
<h3>B. Overview of the Requirements Set Out Under the Finma Gudinace Custody of Crypto Assets</h3>
<p>The FINMA Guidance Custody of Crypto Asstes specifically set outs FINMA&#8217;s supervisory practice in the areas of (i) custody services provided by Swiss licensed banks, (ii) portfolio management services relating to Crypto Assets, (iii) the management of collective assets under the Federal Act on Collective Investment Schemes (<strong>CISA</strong>) and (iv) the offering of exchange traded products (<strong>ETPs</strong>) with Crypto Assets as underlyings.</p>
<h4>1. Custody of Crypto Assets by a Bank</h4>
<p>Under the current banking insolvency regime (article 37 of the Federal Act on Banks and Savings Institutions (<strong>FBA</strong>) in conjunction with article 16 no. 1 FBA), Swiss banks can offer their clients custody arrangements in relation to Crypto Assets under which the segregation of the respective Crypto Assets can be ensured in a bankruptcy scenario. Under the FINMA Guidance 08/2023 – Staking (<strong>FINMA Guidance Staking</strong>) (see also <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/insights/finma-issues-guidance-on-staking-services" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Homburger Bulletin – FINMA Issues Guidance on Staking Services of December 2023</a>), FINMA previously clarified the regulatory requirements which a custody arrangement offered by a bank must satisfy in order to ensure the segregation of Crypto Assets held in custody. Pursuant to the FINMA Guidance Staking, Crypto Assets held by a bank in custody for its clients can be segregated in bankruptcy if (i) the Crypto Assets are held in custody (aa) individually segregated on a client level and (bb) subject to the custodian’s obligation to ensure their immediate availability or (ii) the Crypto Assets are held in custody (aa) in an omnibus account but with records of each client’s fractional share and (bb) subject to the bank’s obligation to ensure their immediate availability. In contrast, if Crypto Assets are held by bank in custody (a) in an omnibus account and with no records of each client’s fractional share or (b) not subject to the bank’s obligation to ensure their immediate availability, such Crypto Assets are not capable of being segregated in bankruptcy proceedings.</p>
<p>Under the FINMA Guidance Custody of Crypto Assets, FINMA has reiterated its previous stance and, in particular, confirmed that Crypto Assets held in custody by a bank that are held under a custody arrangement that ensures segregation of such assets, do from a regulatory perspective not qualify as balance sheet assets of the bank and are as a consequence not subject to the capital adequacy requirements set out under the Federal Capital Adequacy Ordinance (<strong>CAO</strong>).</p>
<p>Banks will, however, under the custody set up offered to its clients often utilize third-party custodians either in Switzerland and/or abroad. Pursuant to the FINMA Guidance Custody of Crypto Assets, no capital requirements under CAO will apply in the context of a sub-custody arrangement involving a sub-custodian abroad if conditions equivalent to the segregation requirements under Swiss law are met. For third party sub-custody arrangement utilized by Swiss banks this means that (i) the foreign third-party custodian must also subject to prudential supervision and (ii) the applicable foreign bankruptcy laws ensure a segregation of the Crypto Assets held in custody in favor of the Bank (and/or its clients) in the bankruptcy of the sub-custodian.</p>
<h4>2. Portfolio Management Services relating to Crypto Assets</h4>
<p>Pursuant to article 24(1) of the Financial Institutions Ordinance (<strong>FinIO</strong>), portfolio managers licensed by FINMA under article 17 et seq. of the Swiss Financial Institutions Act (<strong>FinIA</strong>) must ensure that client assets entrusted to them are held in custody, segregated on a client-per-client basis, with a Swiss bank, a Swiss securities firm, a Swiss DLT trading facility, or a foreign financial institution subject to equivalent prudential supervision.</p>
<p>According to the FINMA Guidance Custody of Crypto Assets, these requirements also apply to Crypto Assets, including cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ether. This position taken by FINMA is noteworthy given that portfolio management activities relating to cryptocurrencies and other Crypto Assets that do not qualify as financial instruments within the meaning of the Federal Act on Financial Services (<strong>FinSA</strong>) do not, as such, trigger the licensing requirements applicable to portfolio managers.</p>
<p>Pursuant to the FINMA Guidance Custody of Crypto Assets, portfolio managers must carefully select the custodians for Crypto Assets. In particular, Crypto Assets must be held with institutions that are subject to prudential supervision, have adequate technical infrastructure and expertise, and ensure bankruptcy protection and segregation of client assets in the event of insolvency. Where custody is provided outside Switzerland, portfolio managers must verify that the applicable foreign supervisory regime and insolvency framework are equivalent to Swiss standards, including with respect to the effective segregation of Crypto Assets in bankruptcy proceedings. It is noteworthy that FINMA does not mention insurance solutions that would fully protect the clients as a possible alternative.</p>
<p>While FINMA expects portfolio managers to adjust custody arrangements that do not comply with these requirements, it acknowledges that legacy arrangements may exist. By way of exception, existing custody arrangements need not be adjusted where (i) foreign custodians are subject to equivalent prudential supervision but no equivalent bankruptcy protection is available, or (ii) custody is provided by Swiss custodians registered with a self-regulatory organization (<em>Selbstregulierungsorganisation</em>) pursuant to article 14 of the Swiss Anti-Money Laundering Act where bankruptcy protection pursuant to article 242a of the Swiss Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy Act is ensured, but prudential supervision is lacking, provided in each case that the portfolio manager has, cumulatively, (a) comprehensively informed clients of the increased custody risks associated with the existing custodian, in particular insolvency risks, (b) informed clients of alternative suitable custodians in Switzerland and abroad, and (c) obtained and documented the client&#8217;s explicit written consent to the continued use of the non-compliant custodian.</p>
<p>Finally, FINMA states that the custody requirements applicable to Crypto Assets may not be circumvented through the use of foreign structures. In particular, where a Swiss portfolio manager invests, on behalf of its clients, in a foreign collective investment scheme for which it acts as sponsor or asset manager, it must ensure that the custody requirements set out in article 24 para. 1 FinIO also apply to the investments made by such foreign collective investment scheme in Crypto Assets.</p>
<h4>3. Management of Collective Assets under CISA</h4>
<p>According to article 73 para 1 CISA the assets of a Swiss collective investment scheme must be held in custody by a Swiss custodian bank (<em>Depotbank</em>). In accordance with article 73 paragraph 2 CISA, the custodian bank may delegate the safekeeping of assets to a third-party custodian or a central securities depository in Switzerland or abroad, provided that such delegation is appropriate. In such cases, investors must be informed in the fund prospectus and in the key information document of the risks associated with the sub-custody arrangement. Moreover, with respect to financial instruments in which a Swiss collective investment scheme has invested, sub-custody may be delegated only to supervised third-party custodians or central securities depositories (article 73 para. 3 CISA).</p>
<p>According to the FINMA Guidance Custody of Crypto Assets, the requirements set out in article 73 CISA also apply to direct investments in Crypto Assets by Swiss collective investment schemes. Based on this, FINMA concludes that Crypto Assets must, as a rule, be held in custody by a Swiss custodian bank and that any delegation of custody by such Swiss custodian bank is permissible only to a third-party custodian subject to equivalent prudential supervision. Consequently, even where a Crypto Asset does not qualify as a financial instrument within the meaning of FinSA –such as cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin or Ether – it may only be held in sub-custody only with a supervised custodian. This supervisory position goes beyond the wording of article 73 paragraph 2 CISA.</p>
<h4>4.  Offering of ETPs with Crypto Assets as Underlying</h4>
<p>ETPs with Crypto Assets as underlying are typically issued in the form of tracker certificates which establish a synthetic exposure to the respective underlying. ETPs can be admitted to trading at SIX Swiss Exchange or BX Swiss, in each case in compliance with the applicable listing rules.</p>
<p>ETPs qualify as structured products within the meaning of article 3 lit. a Nr. 4 FinSA. Pursuant to article 70 FinSA, the issuance of structured products to retail clients by special purpose vehicles is permitted if (i) such products are offered by prudentially supervised institutions in accordance with Article 70 para. 2 FinSA, (ii) a legally enforceable guarantee is granted by a prudentially supervised financial intermediary in accordance with Article 70 para. 1 FinSA in relation to the payment obligations of the issuing special purpose vehicle or (iii) a legally enforceable real security is provided in favor of the investors.</p>
<p>ETPs with Crypto Assets as underlying are typically issued by special purpose vehicles, with the requirements pursuant to article 70 FinSA being met by granting the investors an enforceable security interest, such as a pledge, over the underlying Crypto Assets (or the redemption claim relating thereto). The Crypto Assets subject to the investors&#8250; security are oftentimes held by third party custodians domiciled outside of Switzerland.</p>
<p>Under the FINMA Guidance Custody of Crypto Assets, FINMA, in particular, states that custody arrangements underlying the collateral set-up of ETPs, may pose certain risks. However, FINMA acknowledges that these risks have been addressed for listed ETPs under both SIX Swiss Exchange&#8217;s and BX Swiss&#8250; regulations, as under the applicable listing requirements, the Crypto Assets serving as collateral for the investors in an ETP must be held by a Swiss custodian adequately licensed to provide such custody services or by a foreign custodian subject to equivalent supervision (see also <a href="https://www.homburger.ch/en/insights/six-publishes-new-directive-on-crypto-assets-as-underlying-instruments" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Homburger Bulletin – SIX Publishes New Directive in Crypto Assets as Underlying Instruments of February 2024</a>). In the FINMA Guidance Custody of Crypto Assets, FINMA further clarifies that &#171;real&#187; security pursuant to Article 70 para. 1 FinSA and Article 96 of the Ordinance on Financial Services, in FINMA&#8217;s view, requires legal protection in the event of the insolvency of the custodian of the security.</p>
<h3>C. Outlook</h3>
<p>The FINMA Guidance Custody of Crypto Assets provides helpful clarification with regard to custody arrangements offered and/or used by Swiss supervised institutions:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Banks</strong>: The clarifications set out by FINMA in relation to Crypto Assets held in custody by Swiss banks is substantially in line with FINMA&#8217;s existing regulatory practice and the arrangements, including regarding outsourcing, utilized by banks in the Swiss market. However, the additional considerations published by FINMA with regard to the use of sub-custodians may lead to a need for banks to review their third-party sub-custody arrangements and the pertaining Digital Asset Resolution Plan (DARP). Under FINMA&#8217;s current (unpublished) practice, FINMA applies a risk-weight of approximately 800% to Crypto Assets held on the balance sheet of a bank when calibrating the applicable risk-weighted capital requirements. Due to these considerable capital requirements (which for many Swiss banks prevent them from engaging in on-balance sheet activities relating to Crypto Assets) it will, in particular, be worthwhile for Swiss banks to review their third-party sub-custody arrangements with non-Swiss custodians and to ensure that the applicable bankruptcy regime in connection with the utilized contractual framework provides for a robust protection of the Crypto Assets held in sub-custody outside of Switzerland. In view of the considerable capital requirements applicable to Crypto Assets held on-balance sheet, banks may want to take the necessary precautions to avoid any uncertainties regarding the treatment of such Crypto Assets in a bankruptcy of a sub-custodian.</li>
<li><strong>Portfolio Managers:</strong> Portfolio managers who invest in Crypto Assets on behalf of their clients must review the existing custody arrangements of their clients to ensure compliance with the FINMA Guidance Custody of Crypto Assets. This requires an analysis of the relevant custodians&#8250; regulatory status and insolvency framework, as well as a review of their technical infrastructure and expertise. Where legacy custody arrangements may be continued without modification under FINMA&#8217;s Guidance Custody of Crypto Assets, portfolio managers must inform their clients of the risks associated with such custody arrangements and of potential alternatives, and must obtain the clients&#8250; consent to the continued use of such custody arrangements</li>
<li><strong>Collective Investment Schemes</strong>: Any Swiss collective investment scheme or its custodian bank that does not yet comply with the custody requirements for crypto-based assets set out in the FINMA Guidance Custody of Crypto Assets must adapt its arrangements accordingly. As the FINMA Guidance Custody of Crypto Assets does not allow for any transitional period, these adjustments must be implemented as soon as possible.</li>
</ul>
<p>Finally, as the FINMA Guidance Custody of Crypto Assets ultimately only codifies FINMA&#8217;s supervisory practice, the requirements set out thereunder apply immediately, with no formal transitional periods applying.</p>


RZ_Bulletin_Regulatory Innovations_SB_Preview_Web (2)

FINMA Guidance 01/2026

Kapitalmarkt

Gesellschaftsrecht / M&A

Finanzierungen

Kandou-web-640x140

Homburger News

Homburger advises Kandou AI on its USD 225 m strategic funding round

<p>On March 23, 2026, Swiss-based Kandou AI, a leader in high-speed, energy-efficient connectivity and system solutions for the AI era, announced the successful closing of its USD 225 m strategic funding round with backing from strong financial and strategic investors. The oversubscribed Series-A round was led by Maverick Silicon with strategic participation from SoftBank Group Corp., Synopsys, Inc., Cadence Design Systems, Inc. and Alchip Technologies Limited; several existing investors also participated in the financing round.</p>
<p>The Homburger team advising Kandou AI on all aspects of this transaction comprised Andreas Müller, Anna Peter, Luca Ellenberger, Oriana Schöni, Luca Yousef and Filippo Moggi (all Corporate / M&amp;A), Stefan Oesterhelt and Juliette Buob (both Tax), Stefan Bindschedler, Alexander Wherlock and Sara D’Antoni (all Financing), Luca Dal Molin and Joel Fink (both IP/IT, Data Protection) as well as Angela Casey (Employment and Executive Compensation).</p>


Share-Image Teamplate Deals-and-Cases

Homburger advised Baseline Wealth Management and its founder on its sale to Creative Planning

<p>On January 13, 2026, Baseline Wealth Management, an established FINMA-registered portfolio manager and SEC-registered investment advisor (RIA) with offices in Geneva and Zurich, announced it has joined Creative Planning, one of the largest RIAs in the United States. The transaction represents Creative Planning’s first international acquisition and underscores the value of Baseline&#8217;s extensive experience serving international and U.S. clients. The acquisition adds more than USD 1 bn in assets under management to Creative Planning.</p>
<p>The Homburger team was led by Frank Gerhard (Corporate / M&amp;A) and included Romain Hondius, Thomas Romelli and Constantin Khovrin (all Corporate / M&amp;A), Alexander Wherlock (Financial Market Regulation) and Philippe Weber (Tax).</p>


IP / IT

Datenschutz

Prozesse

Arbeitsrecht und Vergütung für Führungskräfte

Krisenmanagement

Compliance

Wirtschaftsstrafrecht

Untersuchungen

Finanzmarktrecht

Technologie und Digitalisierung

Anlageprodukte

Homburger - New Partners

Homburger - Neue Partner

Wir heissen Reto Ferrari-Visca, Jeremy Reichlin und Alexander Wherlock in unserer Partnerschaft herzlich willkommen.

Drei neue Partner

<p>Wir heissen Reto Ferrari-Visca, Jeremy Reichlin und Alexander Wherlock in unserer Partnerschaft herzlich willkommen.<br />
<a href="https://www.homburger.ch/de/home/welcome?utm_source=News-DE&amp;utm_medium=Newsmeldung-DE&amp;utm_campaign=Partner-26">Learn more.</a></p>


Alexander
Wherlock

Homburger advises Kandou AI on its USD 225 m strategic funding round

Homburger advised Baseline Wealth Management and its founder on its sale to Creative Planning

Drei neue Partner

Revision des Bankengesetzes: Bundesrat verabschiedet Botschaft

Revision of the Federal Act on Financial Institutions – Homburger Consultation Statement

FINMA Guidance 01/2026

The New Payment Instrument Institutions License under the revised Swiss Financial Institutions Act – An Opportunity for Foreign Payment Service Providers?

Blockchain & Cryptocurrency Regulation 2026: Switzerland

Fintech 2026: Switzerland

Join the Team

Alexander Wherlock

Karriere

Sprachen

Zulassung

Teams

AlexanderWherlock

Homburger advises Kandou AI on its USD 225 m strategic funding round

Homburger advised Baseline Wealth Management and its founder on its sale to Creative Planning

Drei neue Partner

Revision des Bankengesetzes: Bundesrat verabschiedet Botschaft

Revision of the Federal Act on Financial Institutions – Homburger Consultation Statement

FINMA Guidance 01/2026

The New Payment Instrument Institutions License under the revised Swiss Financial Institutions Act – An Opportunity for Foreign Payment Service Providers?

Blockchain & Cryptocurrency Regulation 2026: Switzerland

Fintech 2026: Switzerland

Join the Team

Alexander Wherlock

Karriere

Sprachen

Zulassung

Teams

Alexander
Wherlock