On 21 October 2026, the magazine PME published an analysis by journalist Dirk Schütz: in his view, Switzerland does little to promote its financial centre, unlike Luxembourg and Singapore. His starting point is the debate over UBS regulation, in which FINMA's CEO, Stefan Walter, points out that competitiveness is not part of the authority's mandate.
The piece, adapted from an article in the German-language Swiss magazine Bilanz, mixes verifiable facts with a stated opinion. This article compares its figures and its analysis with what the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) says about its own role.
What FINMA's mandate provides
FINMA's statutory mandate is first and foremost about protecting clients. According to the description published by the authority, it protects creditors, investors and policyholders, as well as the proper functioning of the financial markets.
To fulfil this mandate, FINMA has three tools: authorisation, supervision and, where necessary, enforcement of supervisory law. It can also regulate at a subordinate level.
Competitiveness only appears as a consequence of this work. FINMA writes that it "thus contributes to strengthening confidence in the proper functioning, integrity and competitiveness of a forward-looking Swiss financial centre". Competitiveness is therefore an expected outcome, not a supervisory objective.
The authority is also independent of political power. Parliament and the government cannot issue it with instructions on its supervisory activity. It remains subject to parliamentary oversight and is funded by supervisory levies and fees, not by taxes.
CEO Stefan Walter is acting within this framework when he stresses, according to PME, that competitiveness is not a criterion of his mandate. The article contrasts him with the British supervisory authority, the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), which has made the competitiveness of its financial centre a fundamental objective.
How does Bern support the Swiss financial centre?
According to PME, promoting the financial centre is not at the top of the federal authorities' priorities. The article puts forward three indications.
- Finance Minister Karin Keller-Sutter reportedly has only sporadic contact with the heads of the country's 230 banks.
- The Federal Department of Finance has cut its subsidies to the promotion organisation Finance Swiss, on a date the article does not specify. No new funding appears to be planned.
- The Federal Council's international communication strategy has changed its priorities.
This last point is the best documented. In the 2021-2024 edition, published by the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, the financial centre was one of the five priorities. The aim was to raise the visibility of its values and strengths among the international public. In the current strategy, which runs until 2028, it is no longer explicitly mentioned, according to the article.
Luxembourg and Singapore: what do the figures say?
The two competing centres devote substantial resources to their promotion, through a public-private partnership chaired by the Finance Minister in Luxembourg and a fund attached to the Prime Minister in Singapore. The table shows the figures published by PME on 21 October 2026. The article does not specify the year to which the financial sector's shares of the economy refer.
| Centre | Financial sector's share of economic output | Promotion body | Annual budget |
|---|---|---|---|
| Luxembourg | 23.5% | Luxembourg for Finance, a public-private partnership chaired by Finance Minister Gilles Roth | nearly 7 million euros |
| Singapore | 13.5% | Financial Sector Development Fund, attached directly to the Prime Minister | more than 130 million francs (equivalent) |
| Switzerland | 9% | Finance Swiss | not disclosed; federal subsidies reduced |
In Luxembourg, Luxembourg for Finance brings together the centre's main players to defend its competitiveness, notably by attracting skilled talent. In Singapore, the fund finances international promotion and infrastructure projects.
The comparison has its limits. The sources consulted give neither the assets under management nor the number of jobs in the three centres. Nor does a higher share of the financial sector in the economy, on its own, show whether public promotion is the cause.
What is the link with UBS regulation?
The debate on promoting the financial centre is part of the wider debate on the "too big to fail" rules. These rules target systemically important banks, and Switzerland has been considering tightening them since UBS took over Credit Suisse in 2023.
In September 2026, the upper house of Parliament backed a version that would require UBS's foreign subsidiaries to be 90% covered by top-quality capital. According to the bank's own estimates, this version would add around 16 billion dollars to its core capital.
UBS has opposed full coverage of its foreign subsidiaries with top-tier capital from the outset: it considers such a requirement excessive and believes it would put it at a disadvantage against its international competitors. According to the Wall Street Journal, the bank is reportedly examining fallback plans that go as far as moving its headquarters abroad. Neither UBS nor Reuters has confirmed this information.
Fact or opinion: how to read the analysis?
The PME article is a signed analysis, and its facts need to be distinguished from its point of view.
- Reported facts: FINMA's mandate with no competitiveness criterion, the cut in subsidies to Finance Swiss, the absence of the financial centre from the current international communication strategy, which runs until 2028, and the Luxembourg and Singapore budgets.
- The author's interpretations: Switzerland "considers itself above" promoting its financial centre, the centre is losing influence, and Swiss banks "can only dream" of Singapore's resources.
The link between public promotion and the weight of the financial sector is also part of the author's analysis. The article does not demonstrate it with data.
What it means for banks and clients in Switzerland
For bank and insurance clients, the current framework places their protection at the centre of FINMA's mandate. Creditors, investors and policyholders are the designated primary beneficiaries of supervision.
For banks, promoting the financial centre is therefore the responsibility of players other than the supervisory authority: the Federal Council, the federal departments and organisations such as Finance Swiss. The sources consulted do not quantify what more active promotion would change for them or for their clients.
What we do not know yet
- The Federal Council's financial market policy could not be consulted for this article; its exact position on promoting the financial centre remains to be clarified.
- The year and calculation method behind the shares of 23.5%, 13.5% and 9% are not given by the source.
- The amount and date of the cut in subsidies to Finance Swiss are not published in the article.
- The position of the second chamber of Parliament on UBS's capital, and the timetable for entry into force, remain open.
Sources
- PME: the Swiss financial centre and Luxembourg (Dirk Schütz, 21 October 2026)
- FINMA: an independent supervisory authority
- Too big to fail: UBS's plans (2clics, 16 October 2026)
