Swiss business sector opposes government's 'incomprehensible' RBI move
Proposed liability rules would be burdensome, say business federations.
The Swiss Business Federation (economiesuisse) and SwissHoldings have rejected the Federal Council's counter-proposal to the Responsible Business Initiative (RBI).
In the government's counter-proposal, a consultation for which will run until 9 July 2026, Switzerland seeks to introduce a new liability regime that would impact large corporations in terms of diligence and transparency.
The RBI, which has a focus on environmental and human rights protection, was rejected in a referendum in 2020. As a result, a counter-proposal was applied in 2022, mandating the filing of a sustainability report on top of multinationals' annual financial reporting.
Subsequently, the Coalition for Responsible Multinationals – the proponents of the original initiative – put forward a new RBI. The Swiss government, however, turned this down, issuing the 2026 counter-proposal.
Swiss business sector's response
Commenting on the new RBI counter-proposal, federations SwissHoldings and economiesuisse have expressed their strong opposition.
"The national government is proposing new liability rules that would place a massive burden on companies and significantly weaken Switzerland as a business location," said economiesuisse's Erich Herzog, who believes the proposed special regulation is unnecessary.
He explained: "In February 2026, the EU (European Union) removed harmonized group liability in the omnibus procedure from the Supply Chain Directive. The European Commission gave clear reasons for this: an EU-wide liability regime is not required in view of the rules and traditions that already apply in the Member States.
"In light of this, the Federal Council's approach is incomprehensible: While the EU leaves the issue to its member states, the Federal Council wants to introduce new and untested rules on its own initiative and hurry away from the rest of Europe. This is despite the fact that Switzerland already has established case law in the area of corporate liability."
Herzog, whose camp represents around 100,000 companies from all industries, emphasised that the proposed rules would be the same regulation that the EU did not want to introduce.
"This sends out completely the wrong signal at a time when Swiss companies and their employees are under considerable pressure due to the geopolitical situation and weak economy," he said, adding that it's precisely these liability rules that prevented the RBI from being adopted in its original form.
"The current counter-proposal now reintroduces this key element," Herzog pointed out. "This is pure coercion. economiesuisse therefore clearly rejects this counter-proposal."
Similarly, SwissHoldings cited the burdensome effect the proposed regulation would have on multinationals.
"In an economic climate that is already challenging for multinational companies, this would lead to additional regulatory burdens and new liability risks," SwissHoldings declared.
"At the same time, the proposal does not sufficiently take into account current international developments in sustainability regulation, which increasingly aim for a stronger focus on materiality and simplification."
SwissHoldings, which represents 65 multinational companies in the industrial and service fields, went on to comment: "The proposed instruments would not increase legal certainty, but rather, increase complexity, create counterproductive hurdles, and generate additional risks for Swiss companies.
"This leads to competitive disadvantages compared to foreign companies and weakens Switzerland as a business location."
In SwissHoldings' view, effective liability mechanisms are already in place in Switzerland and that new liability models need not be introduced.
For economiesuisse, which is the umbrella organisation for the Swiss business sector, what the country needs are competitive framework conditions as well as stability and reliability.
