Speaking to reporters in Bern on December 11, Swiss National Bank (SNB) vice-chair Antoine Martin reaffirmed the central bank’s support for new “too-big-to-fail” capital requirements proposed for UBS following the 2023 Credit Suisse collapse. The package could force UBS to hold up to US $24 billion in additional capital when it takes effect in 2027.
Although the press conference focused on financial-stability questions, Martin was asked directly about speculation that UBS might move its headquarters abroad to avoid heavier Swiss regulation. He declined to comment on management decisions but stressed that Switzerland offers “real advantages” as a base.
![Swiss National Bank backs stricter UBS rules amid HQ-relocation rumours]()
For global-mobility professionals, the debate is more than rhetorical. Relocating a bank’s legal domicile would set off a wave of executive moves, cross-border commuting arrangements and possible changes to tax equalisation policies. London, New York and Singapore have reportedly been evaluated as alternative HQ sites, all with distinct immigration regimes and shadow payroll obligations.
UBS currently employs roughly 25,000 people in Switzerland, including thousands of internationally mobile staff who benefit from lump-sum taxation concessions for high-earners resident in cantons such as Zug. A shift abroad could jeopardise those incentives and trigger renegotiations of secondment contracts.
While most analysts still consider relocation unlikely, HR leaders are running scenario-planning exercises. The SNB’s continued endorsement of tougher rules suggests the regulatory cost-benefit calculus will remain in flux—keeping mobility teams and relocation vendors on alert for rapid changes to staff deployment plans.
Although the press conference focused on financial-stability questions, Martin was asked directly about speculation that UBS might move its headquarters abroad to avoid heavier Swiss regulation. He declined to comment on management decisions but stressed that Switzerland offers “real advantages” as a base.
For global-mobility professionals, the debate is more than rhetorical. Relocating a bank’s legal domicile would set off a wave of executive moves, cross-border commuting arrangements and possible changes to tax equalisation policies. London, New York and Singapore have reportedly been evaluated as alternative HQ sites, all with distinct immigration regimes and shadow payroll obligations.
UBS currently employs roughly 25,000 people in Switzerland, including thousands of internationally mobile staff who benefit from lump-sum taxation concessions for high-earners resident in cantons such as Zug. A shift abroad could jeopardise those incentives and trigger renegotiations of secondment contracts.
While most analysts still consider relocation unlikely, HR leaders are running scenario-planning exercises. The SNB’s continued endorsement of tougher rules suggests the regulatory cost-benefit calculus will remain in flux—keeping mobility teams and relocation vendors on alert for rapid changes to staff deployment plans.
Source: Reuters
