Blog Post

The consequences of Switzerland’s lost equivalence status

Due to a spat between the European Commission and the government of Switzerland over the negotiation of an institutional framework agreement, equity securities that are listed on Swiss exchanges are banned from being traded on stock exchanges in the European Union. This blog post reviews the background of this incident and assesses the consequences for companies listed in Switzerland as well as EU investors investing in Swiss equity securities.

By: Date: July 25, 2019 Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance

Relations between Switzerland and the European Union are governed by a collection of roughly 120 bilateral agreements. In 2014 the two parties started negotiating an institutional framework agreement which would govern the interpretation and application of these agreements in practice and regulate the adaptation of the agreements to new circumstances if necessary. By the end of last year, the Swiss Federal Council, the executive branch of the Swiss federal government, and the European Commission came up with a draft agreement.

To get ratified in Switzerland, the agreement will most likely have to be submitted to a popular vote. To ensure broad public support, the Swiss government decided in January to publish the draft agreement for consultation with national stakeholders. In June, in a letter to the European Commission President Juncker, the Swiss Federal Council wrote that these consultations showed a need for further clarifications and assurances, particularly on the three aspects of state subsidies, wage protection and the EU citizens’ right for free movement.

In his response, Mr Juncker agreed to provide clarifications but ruled out any renegotiations and urged swift ratification of the agreement before the end of his Commission Presidency in October. However, following this exchange, the Swiss Parliament instructed the Federal Council to pursue additional negotiations or to take other appropriate measures to improve the draft agreement with respect to the three aspects mentioned in the Federal Council’s letter.

Frustrated with what it perceives as a lack of commitment from Switzerland, the European Commission decided to not renew the “recognition of equivalence” of Switzerland’s financial market rules as of July 1st. Since January 2018, the EU Markets in Financial Instruments Directive and Regulation (MiFID II and MiFIR) restrict EU investment firms’ choice of trading venues. Specifically, stocks that are traded in the European Union cannot be traded on stock exchanges of third-countries that are not recognized as having prudential and business conduct requirements which are equivalent to the ones in the EU. In 2017 when the Commission had to grant equivalence status to a range of important financial partner countries, the equivalence decision for Switzerland was limited to one year with an extension made contingent on “progress made towards the signature of an agreement establishing that common institutional framework”.

As the shares of the largest Swiss stock companies are traded both in Switzerland and on European exchanges, the ceasing of Switzerland’s equivalence status would effectively have banned EU investment firms from trading these shares on the Swiss stock exchanges. As a result, participation of European investors on the Swiss stock exchange could have collapsed. To prevent this from happening, the Swiss government prohibited shares of Swiss companies which are listed or traded on a Swiss stock exchange from being traded on EU exchanges. Now that they are no longer traded on exchanges in the European Union, the restriction under MiFIR no longer applies to Swiss equities which means that EU investment firms are released from the requirement to trade them on EU trading venues. The final result of these legal manoeuvres is that since July 1st, shares of companies listed on the Swiss stock exchange are no longer traded on EU exchanges and EU investors are instead buying and selling these shares through providers on the Swiss stock exchange or on other trading venues outside of the EU.[1]

Figure 1: Prices and volumes of Swiss Market Index and Euronext 100 Index (6-month average = 100)

Source: Bruegel based on Bloomberg.


In the short run these new circumstances had not too much of an effect on Swiss equity markets. A newspaper reported on July 1st that market participants expected hardly any impact on trading in Swiss equities. Figure 1 shows the prices of the Swiss Market Index (SMI), Switzerland’s blue-chip stock market index, and Euronext 100, a blue-chip index of the Euronext exchange. Prices are normalized to 100 being the average daily closing price of each index in the first half of 2019 (January to June). The figure shows that the SMI moved largely parallel to the Euronext index since the first of July. The trading volume of the SMI has increased since the beginning of July and has been rather volatile compared to the Euronext 100 Index (figure 1) but not out of the range of what has been observed over the last 3 months.

Figure 2 shows that the overall volume of traded shares on the SIX Swiss Exchange has remained within the range of earlier months and moved close to the trends observed on the Euronext exchanges in Amsterdam and Paris. In conclusion, for the time being, the loss of equivalence has left Swiss equities and the Swiss stock exchange not worse nor better off.

Figure 2: Trade volumes on SIX Exchange in Zurich and Euronext in Amsterdam and Paris (6-month average = 100)

Source: Bruegel based on Bloomberg.


[1] Shares that are cross-listed in Switzerland and in the EU continue to be tradable on Swiss and EU trading venues.

Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

View comments
Read about event

Upcoming Event


China-EU investment relations: Exploring competition and industrial policies

This is a closed-door workshop jointly organised by MERICS and Bruegel looking at China-EU investment relations.

Speakers: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation, Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read article More by this author


The Coming Clash Between Climate and Trade

The new leaders of the European Union, who have relentlessly championed open markets, will, ironically, likely trigger a conflict between climate preservation and free trade. But this clash is unavoidable, and how Europe and the world manage it will help to determine the fate of globalisation, if not that of the climate.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: Energy & Climate, Global Economics & Governance Date: August 1, 2019
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

European champion-ships: industrial champions and competition policy

This blog post investigates the debate on whether European competition rules should foster European industrial champions, or allow national champions to grow to a European scale. It explores the criteria that one would intuitively ascribe to industrial champions, illustrating the difficulties in defining either ‘European’ or ‘Champion’. It then conducts a brief look into whether EU Merger decisions have impeded the formation of ‘European Champions’.

By: Mathew Heim and Catarina Midoes Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: July 26, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author


A reflection on the Mercosur agreement

The EU accepts the deal because it is worried about the catastrophic scenario of a world without the WTO.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: July 26, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Modernising European Competition Policy: A Brief Review of Member States’ Proposals

French, German and Polish governments have jointly proposed options for modernising EU competition policy. The debate to recalibrate European competition rules was already well underway. So, it is not surprising that proposals are consistent with other statements made by France and Germany. Yet, proposals do not address current issues weighing on the international competition community, such as conglomerate effects theory or algorithmic collusion.

By: Mathew Heim Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: July 24, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author


Von der Leyen’s Green Deal isn’t just a plan for the environment

Ursula von der Leyen's proposal of a European Green Deal is ambitious and urgent. Not only does it aim to reduce the continent's emissions, but it also has the potential to grow the EU's economy and transform the bloc's politics.

By: Simone Tagliapietra Topic: Energy & Climate Date: July 18, 2019
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

The 4th industrial revolution: opportunities and challenges for Europe and China

What is the current status of EU-China relations concerning innovation, and what might their future look like?

Speakers: Elżbieta Bieńkowska, Chen Dongxiao, Patrick Child, Eric Cornuel, Maria Demertzis, Ding Yuan, Luigi Gambardella, Jiang Jianqing, Frank Kirchner, Pascal Lamy, Li Mingjun, Gwenn Sonck, Gerard Van Schaik, Reinhilde Veugelers, Wang Hongjian, Guntram B. Wolff, Xu Bin, Zhang Hongjun and Zhou Snow Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: July 12, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Opening speech by Bruno Le Maire

Bruno Le Maire, minister of the economy and finance, delivered the opening speech at Bruegel's event “The Eurozone agreement – a mini revolution?”, 8 July 2019.

By: Bruno Le Maire Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: July 9, 2019
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

‘Lo spread’: The collateral damage of Italy’s confrontation with the EU

The authors assess whether the European Commission's actions towards Italy since September 2018 have had a visible impact on the spread between Italian sovereign-bond yields and those of Germany, and particularly whether the Commission’s warnings have acted as a ‘signalling device’ for bond-market participants that it might be difficult for Italy to obtain the support of the ESM or the ECB’s OMT programme if needed.

By: Grégory Claeys and Jan Mazza Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: July 8, 2019
Read article Download PDF

Policy Brief

The threats to the European Union’s economic sovereignty

Memo to the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. The authors describe the current context and the increasing interlinkages between economics and power politics and the role to play in reinforcing and defending Europe’s economic sovereignty.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Global Economics & Governance Date: July 4, 2019
Read article Download PDF More on this topic

Policy Contribution

Redefining Europe’s economic sovereignty

This Policy Contribution delves into the position of the EU in the current global order. China and the United States increasingly trying to gain geopolitical advantage using their economic might. The authors examine the specific problems that China and the US pose for European economic sovereignty, and consider how the EU and its member states can better protect European economic sovereignty.

By: Mark Leonard, Jean Pisani-Ferry, Elina Ribakova, Jeremy Shapiro and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: June 25, 2019
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Uncertainty over output gap and structural-balance estimates remains elevated

The EU fiscal framework strongly relies on the structural budget balance indicator, which aims to measure the ‘underlying’ position of the budget. But this indicator is not observed, only estimations can be made. This post shows that estimates of the European Commission, the IMF, the OECD and national governments widely differ from each other and all estimates are subject to very large annual revisions. The EU should get rid of the fiscal rules that rely on structural balance estimates and use this opportunity to fundamentally reform its fiscal framework.

By: Zsolt Darvas Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: June 17, 2019
Load more posts