Customer funds in the platform account: What Swiss marketplaces must legally comply with

Anyone operating a Swiss marketplace who accepts customer funds into their own platform account – even only temporarily – may be holding public deposits within the meaning of the Banking Act (BankA). From that point on, licensing requirements by 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), where 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 fund flow lies, and what alternatives Swiss SMEs have.

1. What is a platform account?

A platform account refers to 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 periodically transfers the remainder to the individual merchants.

This model is operationally simple: Una cuenta 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 just a few hours – in an account that does not belong to the ultimate payee, a legal responsibility towards these funds arises.

Swiss law has a precise term for this: public deposits. And the acceptance of these is fundamentally only permitted with a licence pursuant to Art. 1 para. 2 BankA.

2. Why "holding briefly" is not automatically unproblematic

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

The 60-day exemption and its limits

The Banking Ordinance (BankO) provides for an exemption in Art. 5 para. 3 let. c BankO: Credit balances on client accounts that serve solely the settlement of client transactions are not considered deposits – provided no interest is paid on them and the settlement period of 60 days is not exceeded.

This exemption sounds fitting, but must be interpreted strictly. It requires that the funds serve exclusively the settlement – not bridge financing, not collateral, not the marketplace's operational cash flow. As soon as the marketplace uses the funds even partially for its own purposes, or if the 60-day period is systematically exhausted, the exemption lapses.

The issue of commercial operation

In addition, the question of commerciality applies: As soon as a marketplace accepts third-party funds on a regular and planned basis, it operates commercially within the meaning of the BankA. The FINMA Circular 2008/3 "Public deposits with non-banks" specifies the criteria. The threshold for commercial activity is lower than many SMEs assume: It is typically reached with as few as 20 depositors or public advertising for the acceptance of funds.

3. Technical payment flow vs. legal fund flow

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

Technical flow

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

Legal fund flow

The legal fund flow, by contrast, asks: Who has legal power of disposal over the funds at what point in time? If the money first arrives in the marketplace's account, the marketplace – regardless of what its T&Cs say – has actual power of disposal. It could theoretically use the funds differently. 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 business 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 under the BankA

Under Swiss law, public deposits mean: Funds accepted from an indefinite number of persons. Art. 1 para. 2 BankA prohibits the commercial acceptance of public deposits without a banking licence. The term encompasses all liabilities towards customers – regardless of whether they are labelled as "credit balance", "wallet", or "escrow account".

The FinTech licence (Art. 1b BankA)

The FinTech licence pursuant to Art. 1b BankA has existed since 2019. It permits the commercial acceptance of public deposits up to a maximum of EUR 100 million, provided these are neither invested nor interest-bearing. Institutions with a FinTech licence are subject to direct FINMA supervision, must be structured as an AG (company limited by shares), partnership limited by shares, or GmbH (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 grant innovative business models regulated market access below the level of a full banking licence. For a marketplace operator merely seeking to process payments between buyers and sellers, however, it represents a disproportionate amount of effort in most cases.

The sandbox exemption

For very small volumes, the so-called sandbox exemption (Art. 6 para. 2 BankO) exists: Anyone who accepts public deposits of no more than EUR 1 million in total, neither invests them nor pays interest on them, and informs depositors in writing that there is no FINMA supervision and no deposit protection, is not operating commercially and does not require a licence. However, for most marketplaces with relevant transaction volumes, this threshold is quickly exceeded.

Comparison: Regulatory thresholds and licences

5. Why SMEs usually do not want their own licence

For most Swiss SMEs operating a marketplace, obtaining their own FinTech licence or even a banking licence is neither realistic nor practical. 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 supervisory costs, and setting up a compliance organisation. Realistic total costs for the first year range from EUR 500,000 to over EUR 1 million.

Time commitment: The licensing process with FINMA typically takes six to twelve months. During this period, the marketplace cannot operate as planned.

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

AMLA subordination: In addition to licensing, accepting third-party funds generally entails subordination to the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA). Anyone who provides payment services on a commercial basis is deemed a financial intermediary under Art. 2 para. 3 AMLA and must join a self-regulatory organisation (SRO). SRO membership with the VQF, for example, costs an admission fee of around EUR 2,000 plus ongoing annual fees and audit costs. The due diligence requirements (KYC, documentation, reporting obligations to MROS) mean additional operational overhead.

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

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 level: 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 time.

How does split payment work in practice?

An example: On a marketplace for regional produce, a customer orders goods worth 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 merchant. The money never flows through an account of the marketplace.

Regulatory classification

Since the marketplace does not accept any customer funds, the licensing requirement under the BankA generally does not apply. AMLA subordination is also typically avoided with a clean setup, as the marketplace does not act as a financial intermediary. The compliance burden rests with the PSP, which in turn is regulated and assumes the KYC obligations for the sub-merchants.

Comparison: Platform account vs. Split payment

7. Checklist: What you should check before launching

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

• Who is legally the payee – your marketplace or the seller? Only if the seller receives directly is the deposit risk eliminated.

• Do customer funds run through a dedicated business account? If so: Check whether a licensing requirement exists under Art. 1 para. 2 BankA.

• Are funds held temporarily – and if so, for how long? The 60-day exemption (Art. 5 para. 3 let. c BankO) must be interpreted strictly.

• Who verifies the identity of the seller (KYC)? If you perform KYC yourself, you may be a financial intermediary under the AMLA.

• Do you operate a wallet or credit balance model? Credit balances on a user account can be classified as public deposits.

• What is the expected transaction volume? Above EUR 1 million, the sandbox exemption 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 executed – automatically or manually? Manual payouts increase holding time and thus the risk.

• Who bears the risk for refunds and chargebacks? Clarify whether you or the PSP handles reversal processing.

How to process customer funds in compliance 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 sub-merchants, and payouts – including support for TWINT, PostFinance, credit cards, and QR-bill.

The marketplace operator configures their commission logic via the API or the dashboard and can charge their own transaction fees without touching customer funds directly. This generally eliminates the licensing requirement under the BankA and AMLA subordination – the regulatory complexity remains with the regulated partner.