Too big to fail: Council of States discusses UBS rules (cross-border guide)

Regulation for too big to fail institutes is at the heart of the parliamentary debate. The RLP proposes to entrust the rules to the Federal Council.
Context
In brief
- Discussion scheduled within the Council of States
- FDP proposal to send the issue back to the Federal Council
- Initiative put forward by Andrea Caroni (FDP/AR)
- Support from the FDP group and favorable intentions from the Centre
Key facts
What: Too-big-to-fail regulation Where: Council of States When: Thursday (discussion scheduled) Who: Andrea Caroni and FDP councillors Institution involved: UBS
Regulation of banking institutions defined as too big to fail is returning to the center of institutional attention at the federal level. According to the political agenda, the issue regarding the equity capital that UBS will have to hold was scheduled to be discussed on Thursday within the Council of States. However, the handling of the matter could undergo substantial changes following the position taken by the FDP Council of States members. During preliminary meetings, the parliamentary group in fact opted not to address the substance of the issue, preferring to return the entire dossier directly to the Federal Council.
…
Operational details
Historical competencies and regulatory process
Andrea Caroni's intervention emphasized the distribution of institutional competencies within the Swiss legal system. As pointed out by the parliamentarian, provisions concerning the own funds of systematically important banking institutions have historically always fallen within the remit of the Federal Council. Historically, these regulatory parameters have been approved through the instrument of the executive ordinance, a procedural path that does not provide for the use of the popular referendum instrument. For proponents of this approach, keeping the matter under the direct responsibility of the Executive represents the most legally straightforward and efficient way also to address the current situation regarding capital requirements applied to large banks.
…
Key points
Financial assessments and operational prospects
The definition of capital requirements for the main Swiss banking institution represents a fundamental step for the national financial market and for the international perception of the solidity of the Swiss credit system. Industry experts and economic analysts continue to closely monitor the evolution of the institutional debate, evaluating the impact that the various foreign asset financing options could generate on the bank's capital structure and its global competitive capacity. The choice between the full coverage model using superior-quality Common Equity Tier 1 and the mixed solution that integrates subordinated debt instruments such as AT1 bonds involves complex assessments involving supervisory authorities, shareholders, and creditors.
How to follow economic and tax updates
For those who closely follow the economic, tax, and financial dynamics affecting the Swiss territory, it is useful to periodically consult the analysis and planning tools available online. Managing one's financial position, wealth, and taxes requires constant monitoring of continuously evolving federal and cantonal regulations. To delve deeper into aspects related to income management and pension or tax planning, you can use the salary calculator to simulate the impact of deductions and taxes on your employment income in Switzerland.
Source: rsi.ch
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is the main topic discussed in the Council of States?
- The debate concerns the new regulation for institutions defined as too big to fail, with particular reference to the equity capital requirements that UBS will have to hold to cover its foreign holdings.
- What proposal did the PLR make through Andrea Caroni?
- The PLR Group decided not to go into the substance of the matter during the parliamentary debate, proposing to send the dossier back directly to the Federal Council so that the Executive can draw up the new rules by order.
- What is the difference between the Federal Council's proposal and the committee's compromise?
- The Federal Council expects UBS to fully cover the foreign holdings with first-class CET-1 basic own funds. On the other hand, the Economic and Tax Commission has proposed a compromise that allows half of the amount to be covered by AT1 bonds.
Related articles
- All articles: Agreements and politics
- La Banca nazionale svizzera 'promuove' Berna con le misure 'too big to fail'
- Stipendi radiologi e costi sanità: le proposte
- Salari manager casse malattia: il no della Commissione
- Bilaterali III: la Commissione dice sì agli accordi
- La BNS e la Finma accolgono favorevolmente le nuove misure del Consiglio federale sulle banche