Swiss Cross Abroad: USAM's Protest (cross-border guide)

Context

In a nutshell

• USAM disputes the use of the Swiss cross for products made abroad.
• The manufacturer Kybun relocates part of its production to Italy.
• About 40 jobs are affected by the production transfer.
• The IPI introduced the practice in March 2024 to encourage exports.

Key facts

• What: Dispute of the practice on the use of the Swiss cross trademark
• When: March 2024 (introduction of practices) and August 2024 (surveys)
• Where: Bern and Switzerland
• Who: Swiss Union of Arts and Crafts (USAM)
• Percentage of opposition: 90% of respondents
• Declining confidence: 60% of respondents
• Institution involved: Federal Institute of Intellectual Property (IPI)

The Swiss Union of Arts and Crafts (USAM) has expressed firm opposition to the recent practice adopted by the Federal Institute of Intellectual Property (IPI). This legislation, operational since last March, also allows the symbol of the Swiss cross to be affixed to goods produced entirely abroad, provided that they are indications such as "Swiss Design" or "Swiss Engineering". The organization, which represents Swiss small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), denounced during a press conference in Bern the risks linked to this deregulation, fearing a weakening of the national brand and a consequent loss of confidence on the part of local and international consumers.

The Kybun Affair and Relocation

The controversy is

Operational details

Surveys and market perception

Opposition to the new practice is not only a political position of the USAM, but reflects a widespread sentiment among economic operators and the Swiss population. To support its thesis, the organization presented the results of two recent surveys. A first internal survey, addressed to cantonal associations, collected 289 responses, while a representative survey conducted by the Demoscope institute between the beginning of July and the beginning of August on a sample of 1,154 eligible voters confirmed a homogeneous picture of critical issues.

The data shows that almost 90% of the artisans and voters surveyed firmly believe that the Swiss cross should remain an exclusive and distinctive right of the only producers who manufacture their goods entirely in Switzerland. The concern is that brand extension may dilute the perceived value of Swiss quality, making the actual provenance of products less clear. In addition, the Demoscope survey shows that 60% of respondents declare a decrease in their confidence in the symbolic meaning of the Swiss cross following the introduction of the new practice. Half of the entrepreneurs surveyed consider the current regulations as "very disadvantageous" for companies that choose to maintain production within the country, facing the costs and challenges related to local costo della vita.

Impact on

Useful tools to protect your net income

To reduce FX leakage, compare CHF-EUR exchange options and banks for cross-border workers.

Key points

The Genesis of the Regulation

The new practice introduced by the IPI in March 2024 is the result of a long bureaucratic and legal process. The decision of the Federal Institute of Intellectual Property was motivated by the need to protect Swiss companies operating in a complex global economic context, marked by the strength of the Swiss franc and high tariffs imposed in strategic markets such as the United States. In particular, the measure was largely influenced by a long-standing legal dispute undertaken by the shoe manufacturer On, which obtained permission to use the Swiss cross even in the presence of foreign production, provided that certain design and engineering criteria are respected.

What to Do for Swiss Companies

For companies operating on the territory, the current situation requires a strategic reflection on the valorization of their product. Those who still rely on the 'Made in Switzerland' integral can use this element as a competitive lever in marketing, differentiating themselves from those who take advantage of the possibility of affixing the mark even if producing abroad. It is essential that companies closely monitor the evolution of regulations and directives issued by the IPI to avoid sanctions or communication errors. In a market where transparency is becoming an increasingly sought-after asset by consumers, focusing on the complete certification of the production supply chain remains a coherent choice that can be communicated effectively to customers.

…