The trigger is owing money back

Swiss banking law protects the public that entrusts money to businesses. Its core concept is simple: if you accept funds from the public and thereby become their debtor — the client can ask for the money back — you are, in principle, taking deposits. Done commercially, that is banking, and banking requires a licence.

The concept is deliberately broad, and that breadth is what catches product teams. Prepaid balances in an app, customer wallets, funds collected today to be forwarded next week, money parked "for convenience" between transactions — each of these can amount to owing the public money. There is no requirement that you call it a deposit, pay interest on it, or think of yourself as anything like a bank. What the client sees as a balance, the law may see as a deposit.

There are recognised carve-outs at framework level — among them funds that merely pass through as settlement of a transaction, certain arrangements with licensed institutions, and the sandbox regime that tolerates limited deposit-taking within defined bounds. But every carve-out has edges, and models that drift — balances held a little longer, used a little more freely — drift across them.

Structures that typically stay outside

The same client experience can usually be built in several legal shapes, and the shapes are not equal:

  • Pass-through design: funds are accepted only to be forwarded promptly in settlement of a specific transaction, never held as a standing balance.
  • Licensed partners: the client's account and balance sit with a partner bank or licensed institution; your product operates on top of accounts you never owe.
  • Segregation and safekeeping: client funds are held separately from your own assets in structures designed so that you are not simply the client's debtor.

Which of these fits — and whether the carve-out you are counting on actually covers your flows — depends on the details: who owes whom, when, and what happens if your company fails. That last question is the one the law ultimately cares about.

Why this decides business models

Deposit-taking is not a compliance nuance; it is the dividing line between a product you can launch and one you cannot. Holding client balances yourself may enable float income and a smoother experience, but it puts a banking licence — or a fintech licence, or a sandbox constraint — between you and the market. Building on a partner bank avoids the licence but costs margin and adds dependency. These trade-offs belong in the business plan, priced, before the first client franc arrives.

If your product touches client money, it is worth mapping the exact flows with a lawyer before you commit to an architecture — moving the money later is much harder than drawing it right.