← Regulations / Switzerland / Operating Models / Self-custodial wallet

Self-custodial wallet / non-custodial software in Switzerland

Publisher of software where users hold their own private keys. The publisher never holds, controls, or has access to user funds.

Permitted AI-Generated · Unreviewed

Self-custodial wallet is permitted in Switzerland with no licensing burden.

Verdict Details

Permitted
yes
Local entity required
No
Licensing burden
None
Last updated
2026-07-13

AML Obligations

  • No AML obligations attach to the software publisher itself, because it never holds, controls, or has access to user funds or private keys — the publisher is not a financial intermediary under AMLA.
  • Users who use the wallet for transactions exceeding CHF 1,000/month become subject to KYC requirements at the counterparty (exchange/custodian), but this obligation does not flow to the non-custodial software publisher.

Key Restrictions

  • The publisher must not hold, control, or have access to user private keys or funds — any model that crosses into custody (e.g. hosted key recovery, m-of-n signing by the publisher) would trigger FINMA licensing requirements (banking license or FinTech license).
  • No geofencing or licensing required for pure non-custodial software distribution.
  • If the wallet integrates an exchange, swap, or staking feature where the publisher exercises control or intermediation, those features may trigger separate VASP classification and SRO membership.

Key Risks

  • Feature-creep risk: adding any custodial element (key backup, aggregated swap matching, fee routing through publisher-controlled accounts) could retroactively classify the publisher as a financial intermediary requiring SRO membership and AML compliance.
  • Regulatory ambiguity on embedded non-custodial DeFi features (e.g., in-app swaps via third-party protocols) — FINMA looks at economic function, not technology, so integrated features may be scrutinized.
  • Consumer-protection exposure: Swiss law does not have a specific 'non-custodial software' framework — reliance on formal guidance opinions (FINMA no-action letters) may be prudent for complex products.

Evidence

This verdict synthesizes the following facts. Each fact links to its primary source(s).

licensing 20% confidence

Technology Neutrality: Regulation focuses on the economic function and purpose of an asset or activity, not the underlying technology. This means that if a crypto asset or service performs a function traditionally regulated by financial law, it will be subject to those regulations.

licensing 20% confidence

CUSTODY: Banking license or FinTech license required for holding client crypto assets. DLT Act provides legal certainty — client crypto segregated in custodian bankruptcy.

licensing 20% confidence

VASP: Activity-dependent — no single 'crypto license'. SRO membership (1-3 months, no minimum capital): exchange, brokerage. FinTech license (3-6 months, CHF 300K): deposit-taking up to CHF 100M without lending. Banking license (12-18 months, CHF 10M+): full banking. DLT Trading Facility (6-12 months): multilateral DLT securities trading.

licensing 85% confidence

FINMA — All financial market supervision — licensing, AML enforcement, ICO/STO guidance, stablecoin regulation

[primary] FINMA
licensing 20% confidence

AMLA (Anti-Money Laundering Act) (1998) — AML/CFT for VASPs — strict KYC/CDD, suspicious activity reporting, Travel Rule

aml 20% confidence

Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA/GwG): Core legislation mandating AML/CFT obligations for financial intermediaries, including VASPs handling cryptocurrencies, custodians, and exchanges. It requires joining a recognized SRO and full compliance with KYC, record-keeping, and reporting.

aml 20% confidence

Threshold: KYC mandatory for transactions exceeding CHF 1,000 per month; prove ownership of non-custodial wallets.

Verdict Attribution

Source:
AI-Generated · Unreviewed
AI synthesized:
2026-07-13 (deepseek-chat)
Last updated:
2026-07-13
Confidence:
high

This verdict was produced by an AI model from the underlying facts. Confirm with counsel before relying on it for material decisions.

Permitted — Pure non-custodial wallet software publishing does not trigger VASP classification or AML obligations under Swiss law, because the publisher never holds, controls, or accesses user funds or private keys, and FINMA's technology-neutral approach regulates economic function rather than technology.

Questions this verdict aims to answer

  • Does software publishing trigger VASP / MSB classification?
  • Do AML obligations attach when no custody exists?
  • What disclosure or consumer-protection rules apply?