Anyone operating a Swiss marketplace who accepts customer funds into their own platform account – even temporarily – may be holding public deposits within the meaning of the Banking Act (BankA). From this point on, the licensing requirements of the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) and the due diligence obligations of the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) apply. The regulatory safest alternative for SMEs is a split-payment model via a licensed Payment Service Provider (PSP), in which the customer funds never touch the marketplace.

This guide explains what a platform account is, why short holding periods are not a free pass, where the line between technical payment flow and legal money flow lies, and what alternatives Swiss SMEs have.

1. What is a platform account?

A platform account is a bank account held in the name of the marketplace operator into which payments from buyers are received before they are forwarded to the actual sellers. The marketplace collects the funds, deducts its commission, and transfers the remainder periodically to the individual Comerciante.

This model is operationally simple: a single bank connection, a single settlement. Yet it is precisely this simplicity that makes it problematic from a regulatory perspective. Because as soon as customer funds lie – even for hours – in Una cuenta that does not belong to the final recipient of the payment, a legal responsibility for those funds arises.

Swiss law has a precise term for this: public deposits. And accepting them is, according to Art. 1 para. 2 BankA, fundamentally only permitted with a licence.

2. Why "keeping it short" is not automatically unproblematic

Many marketplace operators argue that they only buffer customer funds for a few days and are therefore not regulated. This assumption falls short.

The 60-day exception and its limits

The Banking Ordinance (BankO) provides for an exception in Art. 5 para. 3 lit. c BankO: credit balances on customer accounts that serve solely to settle customer transactions do not qualify as a deposit – provided that no interest is paid on them and the settlement period of 60 days is not exceeded.

This exception sounds suitable, but is to be interpreted narrowly. It requires that the funds serve exclusively for settlement – not for interim financing, not as security, not as the operational cash flow of the marketplace. As soon as the marketplace uses the funds even partially for its own purposes or the 60-day limit is regularly exhausted, the exception ceases to apply.

The issue of commercial activity

In addition, the question of commercial activity arises: as soon as a marketplace regularly and systematically accepts third-party funds, it is acting commercially within the meaning of the BankA. The FINMA Circular 2008/3 "Public deposits with non-banks" defines the criteria. The threshold for commercial activity is lower than many SMEs assume: it is usually reached with as few as 20 depositors or public advertising for the acceptance of funds.

3. Technical payment flow vs. legal money flow

In practice, the technical and legal payment flows often differ fundamentally – and this is precisely where regulatory risks arise.

Technical flow

The technical flow is about how data and payment instructions flow between systems: the buyer enters their payment details, the payment API processes the transaction, and settlement occurs to a defined target account. Technically, this process can be designed in any way.

Legal money flow

The legal money flow, on the other hand, asks: who has legal power of disposal over the funds at what point in time? If the money first lands in the account of the marketplace, the marketplace has actual power of disposal – regardless of what its terms and conditions say. It could theoretically use the funds for other purposes. And it is precisely this power of disposal that triggers regulatory obligations.

A concrete example: a marketplace for trade services collects EUR 5’000 from the customer. Technically, everything runs via an API. But the money remains in the marketplace's corporate account for 14 days before the tradesperson is paid out. During these 14 days, the marketplace is holding third-party funds – with all the regulatory consequences.

4. What are public deposits – and what is the FinTech licence?

Public deposits according to BankA

Under Swiss law, public deposits mean: funds accepted from an unlimited number of people. Art. 1 para. 2 BankA prohibits the commercial acceptance of public deposits without a banking licence. The term covers all liabilities to customers – regardless of whether they are described as a "credit balance", "wallet", or "escrow account".

The FinTech licence (Art. 1b BankA)

The FinTech licence under Art. 1b BankA has existed since 2019. It allows the commercial acceptance of public deposits up to a maximum of EUR 100 million, provided that these are neither invested nor interest-bearing. Institutions with a FinTech licence are subject to direct FINMA supervision, must be organised as a public limited company, partnership limited by shares, or limited liability company, and must have their registered office in Switzerland. The minimum capital is EUR 300’000 or 3% of the accepted deposits.

The FinTech licence was created to allow innovative business models regulated market access below a full banking licence. For a marketplace operator who merely wants to process payments between buyers and sellers, however, it represents a disproportionately high effort in most cases.

The sandbox exception

For very small volumes, there is the so-called sandbox exception (Art. 6 para. 2 BankO): anyone who accepts public deposits totaling no more than EUR 1 million, does not invest them, pays no interest, and informs the depositors in writing that there is no FINMA supervision and no deposit insurance, is not acting commercially and does not require a licence. However, this threshold is quickly exceeded for most marketplaces with relevant transaction volumes.

Comparison: Regulatory thresholds and licensing

5. Why SMEs usually do not want their own licence

For most Swiss SMEs operating a marketplace, their own FinTech licence or even a banking licence is neither realistic nor sensible. The reasons are manifold:

Costs: The minimum capital for a FinTech licence alone is EUR 300’000. In addition, there are costs for the licensing process (FINMA fees, external consultants, audit firm), ongoing supervision costs, and the establishment of a compliance organisation. Realistic total costs for the first year are EUR 500’000 to over EUR 1 million.

Time required: The licensing process at FINMA typically takes six to twelve months. During this time, the marketplace cannot operate as planned.

Ongoing obligations: A licensed institution must run an internal control system (ICS), mandate an audit firm, report regularly to FINMA, and maintain a risk management system – requirements that are hardly sustainable for a team of five to ten people.

AMLA subordination: In addition to the licence, accepting third-party funds usually triggers subordination to the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA). Anyone who provides payment services on a professional basis is deemed to be a financial intermediary under Art. 2 para. 3 AMLA and must join a self-regulatory organisation (SRO). SRO membership at VQF, for example, costs around EUR 2’000 in admission fees plus ongoing annual fees and audit costs. The due diligence obligations (KYC, documentation, reporting obligations to the MROS) mean additional operational effort.

The key point is: a marketplace operator wants to facilitate transactions between buyers and sellers and earn a commission for doing so. No one should have to build a quasi-bank for that.

6. Alternative: PSP split payment

The regulatory safest solution for Swiss marketplaces is a split-payment model via a licensed Payment Service Provider (PSP). With split payment, the buyer's payment is split directly at the PSP: the platform commission goes to the marketplace's account, and the remaining amount flows directly to the seller. The marketplace never touches the customer funds at any point.

How does split payment work in practice?

An example: on a marketplace for regional products, a customer orders goods for EUR 150. The marketplace charges a 10% commission. At checkout, the customer pays via the PSP. The PSP splits the payment automatically: EUR 15 goes to the marketplace (commission), EUR 135 goes directly to the Comerciante. The money never flows through an account of the marketplace.

Regulatory classification

Since the marketplace does not accept customer funds, the licensing requirement under BankA is usually eliminated. Also, subordination to the AMLA does typically not apply if the structure is clean, as the marketplace does not act as a financial intermediary. The compliance burden lies with the PSP, which in turn is regulated and handles the KYC obligations for the sub-merchants.

Comparison: Platform account vs. split payment

7. Checklist: What to check before launching

Before equipping your marketplace in Switzerland with a payment solution, clarify the following points:

• Who is the legal recipient of the payment – your marketplace or the seller? Only if the seller directly receives it is the deposit risk avoided.

• Do customer funds flow through Una cuenta belonging to your company? If so: check whether there is a licensing obligation under Art. 1 para. 2 BankA.

• Are funds being buffered – and if so, for how long? The 60-day exception (Art. 5 para. 3 lit. c BankO) is to be interpreted narrowly.

• Who verifies the identity of the sellers (KYC)? If you handle KYC yourself, you might be a financial intermediary according to the AMLA.

• Are you operating a wallet or credit balance model? Balances on a user account can qualify as public deposits.

• What is the expected transaction volume? Above EUR 1 million, the sandbox exception no longer applies.

• Have you had the model legally reviewed? An individual legal assessment is recommended for any model that touches customer funds.

• How are payouts to sellers made – automatically or manually? Manual payouts increase the holding period and thus the risk.

• Who carries the risk for refunds and chargebacks? Clarify whether you or the PSP handle reversal processes.

How to process customer funds compliantly with Payrexx

Payrexx offers a marketplace payment solution based on the split-payment principle. As a Swiss Payment Service Provider (PSP), Payrexx handles the splitting of payments, the KYC onboarding of the sub-merchants, and the payouts – including support for TWINT, PostFinance, credit cards, and QR-bill.

The marketplace operator defines their commission logic via the API or the Dashboard and can charge their own transaction fees, without touching customer funds themselves. This usually eliminates the licensing requirement under BankA and the AMLA subordination – the regulatory complexity lies with the regulated partner.