{
  "id": 9354864,
  "title": "Ein «extremer Sonderweg» oder ein «gelungener Kompromiss»? Das sagen Experten zu den Kapitalregeln für die UBS",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/09/23/ein-extremer-sonderweg-oder-ein-gelungener-kompromiss-das-sagen",
  "topic": "business",
  "section": "Business",
  "published": "2026-09-23T15:00:15.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "NZZ Wirtschaft",
    "slug": "nzz-wirtschaft",
    "url": "https://www.nzz.ch/wirtschaft/ein-extremer-sonderweg-oder-ein-gelungener-kompromiss-das-sagen-experten-zu-den-kapitalregeln-fuer-die-ubs-ld.10025141"
  },
  "original_language": "de",
  "account": "Experts have differing opinions on the capital rules introduced for UBS by the Ständerat, with some calling it an \"extreme special case\" and others describing it as a \"successful compromise.\" The conflict lines in the capital dispute remain entrenched. The Ständerat approved the new capital rules for UBS on Wednesday, with a clear majority voting in favor of a 90% capital coverage for foreign subsidiaries of the large bank at the Swiss parent firm. The Bundesrat could not fully implement its demand for a complete capital coverage. The proposal from the Economics Commission of the small chamber fell short of this goal, proposing a half coverage by core capital and AT1 bonds for UBS subsidiaries. The reactions to the Ständerat decision also reflect the conflict lines in the capital dispute. UBS stated in a statement that the decision represents an \"excessive tightening\" of Swiss capital requirements, which are among the strictest in the world. The bank argued that the decision disregards the consultation process during the review, in which economic representatives, associations, and most cantons participated. The Ständerat also overlooked the financial support provided by UBS shareholders, which enabled the takeover of Credit Suisse and protected Switzerland's reputation. If the 90% variant is implemented, UBS would need to build up approximately $16 billion in additional capital, in addition to the $2 billion it must raise under the amended equity regulation. UBS calculates that it would incur total costs of around $2.5 billion per year under this proposal. The Swiss Bankers Association supports UBS, describing the approach as an \"extreme and very expensive regulatory stance\" not practiced in competing financial centers such as London or New York. The many tied-up own funds at UBS would also no longer be available for financing or investments in Switzerland, weakening the competitiveness of the financial center. Some legal scholar Corinne Zellweger-Gutknecht from the University of Basel expressed relief that the Ständerat members did not tactically vote together, emphasizing that the majority decision demonstrates the Ständerat's commitment to strengthening the UBS parent firm. She views the majority result as a successful compromise and an important step. Zellweger-Gutknecht sees positive aspects for UBS and the Swiss financial stability, as well as the competitiveness of the bank, while acknowledging a partial disadvantage in the 90% coverage compared to the Bundesrat's demand. However, she believes that the 90% coverage will be more favorable for the bank. The third option, which the Ständerat had to choose from, proposed a full capital coverage with 50% AT1 bonds, which should have been modified. This raised questions about the international compatibility of the proposal. Full and binding cessation of interest payments would have been an international outlier, according to legal scholar Zellweger-Gutknecht. The financial expert Andreas Ita, a partner at the consultancy Orbit36 specializing in capital issues, views the Ständerat's proposal more critically. The 90% variant comes very close to a full coverage, but the bank gains little cost-wise, he notes. The overall capital buildup would be manageable for UBS over a seven-year transition period, but the permanent capital costs are still very high, according to Ita. The Ständerat's option to leave 10% uncovered is not considered a material risk by Ita, but he regrets that hybrid capital like AT1 instruments were not given more credit. These instruments represented a valuable and internationally established reserve buffer that would not be depleted if needed in a crisis. UBS shares reacted with slight declines to the Ständerat decision, hoping for a compromise. The business is now forwarded to the National Council, and Pfänder expresses surprise at how close the proposal is to the original draft from the Bundesrat. \"The difference is not large,\" he notes.",
  "summary": "Die strengeren Kapitalvorgaben, die der Ständerat für die Grossbank verabschiedet hat, lösen gegensätzliche Reaktionen aus. Die Konfliktlinien im Kapitalstreit bleiben verhärtet.",
  "key_points": [
    "Experts debate UBS capital rules as \"extreme special case\" or \"successful compromise\"",
    "Ständerat approved 90% capital coverage for UBS foreign subsidiaries",
    "UBS faces $16 billion additional capital requirement under 90% proposal"
  ],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}