case in some US States (like Delaware). But as indicated
it is a brutal rapport de force and not a perfect world in
which arguments are examined fairly and quietly.’
‘The institute of Swiss banking secrecy has been
abused by some of the bank clients in the past to com-
mit tax evasion or tax fraud, and some of the Swiss banks
have probably not made great efforts to prevent it,’
comments Urs Feller. ‘However, it is primarily the client
that commits the offence. In Switzerland, the state
entrusts the individual with the correct declaration of his
or her assets for tax purposes while the bank does not
have a responsibility in this respect and does not provide
the tax authorities with the annual account statements.
This is up to the client i.e. the tax payer. Moreover, it is
prohibited that the bank releases information to any
third party (including tax authorities) outside of a pend-
ing investigation. In respect to other offences, such as
money laundering, Swiss banks are, however, obliged by
law to inform the authorities as soon as they suspect that
an offence has been committed.’
‘It is obvious that banking secrecy in Switzerland, as
in other countries, was abused in certain cases,’ says
Adrian Dörig. ‘However, there has always been a limit to
it. The new Swiss rules and regulations require the
banks today to make sure that new funds are coming
from declared money. Please bear in mind, however,
that privacy can also be important to clients that are
fully tax compliant.’
‘Currently, the concept of Swiss banking secrecy
does not seem up for debate,’ adds Urs Feller. ‘Since
1995, the Swiss Bankers Association has conducted rep-
resentative surveys with regard to the population’s atti-
tude towards the banking sector. According to the most
recent opinion poll of 2011, the support for bank-client
confidentiality remains strong. Almost all of the persons
polled were of the opinion that financial privacy must
be guaranteed, with 91% stating that they want bank
clients’ financial data to be protected against third par-
ties. This does not mean that tax fraudsters can make
use of the confidentiality and safety in Switzerland for
their criminal purposes. The protection of confidentiali-
ty is only available to clients who are tax compliant. The
numerous recently concluded double taxation agree-
ments with several European countries as well as with
Mexico, Qatar and Australia make the position of
Switzerland more than evident. Under the new treaties,
administrative assistance will become less formalistic. In
the future, indicating the name and the address of a
taxpayer and the information holder is no longer
absolutely necessary for valid requests for administrative
assistance, provided identification can be ensured by
other means and the request does not constitute a fish-
ing expedition.’
‘I believe that international (and domestic!) criticism
was justified to such extent as it pointed to a business
model of Swiss banks which obviously encouraged for-
eigners to evade taxes,’ concludes Bernhard Lötscher.
‘This aberration has been corrected by the implementa-
tion of the OECD tax information exchange standards
and a more restrictive regulatory framework. Further
measures are underway, e.g. by agreements with
Germany and the UK on the collecting by Switzerland
of a withholding tax on assets held by German/UK tax
payers with Swiss banks and income earned thereon.
Switzerland is clearly not a tax haven, and all the less
can it be called uncooperative. The Swiss Government
will have to strengthen its efforts to correct any contin-
uing misperceptions of the Swiss role in, and contribu-
tion to, the combating of tax crime in an international
context.’ ■
%DVHO; = ULFK; ; ZZZ; YLVFKHU;FRP
YOUR TEAM FOR SWISS LAW
