Payment institutions and EMIs: how they fit in

Anyone designing a payment service — a wallet, a prepaid card, an app that moves money on behalf of users — soon reaches the question that matters: what kind of entity am I becoming from a regulatory standpoint? In many jurisdictions there are dedicated categories — payment institution, electronic money institution (EMI) — each with its own licence. Switzerland takes a different approach, and it needs to be understood well, because the underlying logic is not the same as in the European Union.

The Swiss logic: it’s the activity that counts

Swiss supervision follows the principle of technological neutrality: it starts not from the label (“I’m an EMI”), but from what the entity actually does. There is no “EMI” licence replicated from the EU model; instead there are qualifying activities that, depending on the economic substance, fall under different regimes. The right question is not “which EMI licence do I apply for”, but “what is the nature of my activity”: am I collecting and transferring funds? issuing a means of payment? holding client money? for how long and with what safeguards?

The typical classifications of a payment service

Depending on the model, a payment service can sit at very different levels:

• Payment services as financial intermediation. Many payment activities constitute financial intermediation for anti-money-laundering purposes: transferring assets on behalf of third parties, issuing means of payment, managing prepaid accounts. This triggers subjection to the AMLA (Anti-Money Laundering Act) and the obligation to affiliate with a self-regulatory organisation (SRO) or to operate under an entity that is already supervised.
• Holding client funds. If the model involves holding client funds, you enter deposit territory: here thresholds, holding periods and the use of the funds become relevant, and the sandbox regime, the fintech licence or higher requirements may be triggered.
• Ancillary and technological activities. Software development, purely technical gateways, orchestrating flows without ever touching the funds normally remain outside the licensing perimeter — but the line is thin and must be checked case by case.

Electronic money: mind the concept

Issuing electronic money — monetary value stored and spent with third parties — is not neutral. Holding the money that users load onto a wallet is, in substance, holding public funds: depending on how the model is designed (segregated funds, timing, remuneration), it may fall within the deposit perimeter with the related obligations. Calling it “electronic money” does not exempt it from the substantive classification.

The corporate structure

The typical form for an institution that wants to grow and raise capital is the AG (public limited company): minimum capital of CHF 100,000 (of which at least 50,000 paid in), shareholders not entered in the register, a structure suited to investors. For regulated activities, the capital and organisational requirements set by the supervisory authority are often well above the statutory minimum: the structure must be sized to the regulatory perimeter, not to the formal minimum. Adequate governance, control functions, risk management and people who meet the fit-and-proper requirements are all needed.

Anti-money laundering is the heart of the matter

For a payment service, anti-money laundering is not an add-on: it is the substance of subjection. Client identification, clarification of the beneficial owner, transaction monitoring, reporting obligations. Setting up these controls from the product design stage — not afterwards — is what distinguishes a clean launch from one that stalls at the first inspection or the first request from a banking partner.

The most costly mistake: thinking in labels

Those coming from the European model tend to ask “how do I get the EMI licence in Switzerland” — a poorly framed question, because that category does not transfer mechanically. The most common failure is regulatory: starting without having classified the activity leads either to operating without a required authorisation, or to burning months in pointless procedures. The correct sequence is always: define the activity, identify the regime, build the structure accordingly.

How SIH ONE approaches the topic

SIH ONE handles structuring and advice: classifying the payment service, identifying the perimeter (AMLA/SRO, holding of funds, any required authorisation), designing the corporate and governance structure, setting up the anti-money-laundering controls. Where the activity requires supervisory authorisation or SRO affiliation, the regulated activities go through authorised partners.

This content is informational and does not constitute legal or regulatory advice. The framework evolves: every model must be verified in the specific case.

Are you building a payment service and want to understand which regime you fall under? Let’s talk: we classify your activity and identify the right structure, with the right partners where authorisation is required.