Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
UBS chair Colm Kelleher and US Treasury secretary Scott Bessent have privately discussed moving the bank’s headquarters to the US, as the Zurich-based lender explores contingency plans to leave Switzerland if the government does not back down on new capital rules.
Kelleher and Bessent held talks in recent months about what a move to the US would look like for the lender, with the Trump administration receptive to welcoming one of Switzerland’s most prized assets, according to three people familiar with the conversation.
The talks with Bessent are part of an ongoing effort by Kelleher to put pressure on the Swiss government over proposed capital requirements that would force UBS to hold an additional $26bn of capital, a move UBS has described as “extreme” and disproportionate.
The uncertainty surrounding the planned changes has weighed on the bank’s share price, and a public and private lobbying campaign by the lender’s management has so far yielded few results.
UBS has argued that the new requirements go further than those required of global peers and would reduce its ability to compete internationally.
Meanwhile, the Swiss government has said it needs to shore up the country’s banking system to avoid another Credit Suisse-style collapse. UBS acquired its crosstown rival in 2023 in a state-orchestrated rescue.
“As we have said repeatedly, we want to continue to operate successfully as a global bank out of Switzerland,” UBS said.
US regulators have been wary of large lenders redomiciling in the country, given public anger over taxpayer-funded bailouts of banks during the financial crisis. However, the Trump administration has been more open to the idea of attracting European financial institutions.
UBS executives want the bank’s headquarters to remain in Switzerland if they can convince parliament to reduce the proposed hit, according to people familiar with their thinking. However, they believe they have a fiduciary duty to examine all potential options and are open to the idea of leaving if the proposals do not change, the people added.
Activist investor Cevian Capital, which has a sizeable stake in UBS, said in September that the proposed Swiss capital changes would make it “not viable” to run a large international bank from the country. It added that UBS would have “no other realistic option” but to leave Switzerland if the proposals were not watered down.
The intervention by Europe’s largest dedicated activist investor added weight to the idea that UBS could move its headquarters out of Switzerland, an idea that some in the industry view as a negotiating tactic that is unlikely to happen in practice.
Switzerland’s decision to impose stricter capital rules comes as the US pursues deregulation in various parts of the economy to boost growth and encourage businesses to expand their operations in the country.
The administration has signalled its intent to loosen rules governing banks, with the US Treasury secretary using the growth of private credit as an example that lenders have been “too tightly constrained”. He has also argued in favour of minimising capital and liquidity rules in a bid to free up more space for lending.
The Trump administration’s push to relax bank rules has sparked concern among European authorities that US deregulation will give American lenders an advantage over transatlantic rivals and create risks for the stability of the global financial system.
