Token classification ruling
The written FINMA classification (payment, utility or asset token) that settles whether your token is a security before the token generation event.
Token classificationThere is no single Swiss “crypto licence”. Most exchanges, brokers, wallets and payment businesses are financial intermediaries needing SRO membership; activities touching deposits, securities or funds need a full FINMA licence; and a new crypto-institution category is coming. We map the business to the right authorisation, form the Swiss entity and substance it rests on, and run the application, built to convert when the 2027 regime lands.
SRO for intermediaries, FINMA where the activity demands, mapped to your model.
Switzerland has no standalone “crypto licence”. It regulates crypto through its existing financial-market laws, so the authorisation you need follows from what you do. The starting point for most businesses is membership of a FINMA-supervised self-regulatory organisation (SRO) under the Anti-Money Laundering Act, the route for exchanges, brokers, custodial wallets and payment services acting as financial intermediaries. Cross into deposits, securities or collective investments and a full FINMA licence applies instead.
A proposed FinIA revision would add a crypto-institution licence and a payment instrument licence, expected around 2026–2027, shifting many firms from SRO membership to direct FINMA supervision. The detail is in the classification and AML pages, and the financial-regulation practice.
The wrong starting assumption (that a crypto business “gets a licence”) wastes months. The route depends on the activity, and the map is changing. Here is how the options line up.
| Activity | Authorisation now | Under the FinIA reform |
|---|---|---|
| Exchange / broker / wallet | SRO membership (AMLA) | Crypto-institution licence (proposed) |
| Custody & staking | SRO + deposit-boundary analysis | Crypto-institution licence (proposed) |
| Stablecoin / payments | Deposit or fund analysis | Payment instrument licence (proposed) |
| Trading venue for tokens | DLT trading facility licence | Unchanged |
| Asset-token issuance | Securities law + ruling | Unchanged |
The table shows the shape; the right cell for you turns on the precise mechanics of how you hold assets and what your token does. We settle that in the mapping step — before any application — so the route is correct now and ready for the reform.
The route follows from the mechanics, not the label a project gives itself. Five common models, and where each actually lands under the regime as of June 2026.
Matching buyers and sellers of crypto, or dealing as principal, is financial-intermediary activity under the Anti-Money Laundering Act. The route is SRO membership, with full KYC, monitoring and the Travel Rule. It stays SRO until the business starts holding client fiat in a way that creates a deposit claim, at which point the deposit-boundary question opens.
Holding clients’ crypto and staking it engages two questions at once: the AML perimeter (SRO), and whether the way assets are held and rewards are passed on crosses into deposit-taking or collective investment. Segregation in bankruptcy under the DLT Act is the pivot. This is the model the proposed crypto-institution licence is designed for.
A redeemable token backed by fiat usually creates a claim that looks like a deposit, and can engage banking or fund rules depending on the reserve. SRO membership alone does not cover it. Today this is a deposit-or-fund analysis; under the reform it points at the payment instrument licence.
Running multilateral trading of tokenised securities is not an SRO matter at all. It needs a DLT trading facility licence, a full FINMA authorisation, and the issuance of asset tokens brings securities and prospectus law with it.
Pure software that never holds client assets or keys (an interface, a self-custody wallet) may fall outside financial-intermediary status entirely. The analysis turns on whether the provider ever has practical control of assets. Getting this conclusion documented, rather than assumed, is what protects the launch.
Most failed or delayed Swiss crypto launches trace back to the same handful of misreadings, settled cheaply at the mapping stage, expensive once an application is in.
The order is deliberate: classify the activity, build the entity and compliance to fit, then apply. Skipping the mapping is what produces rejected or mis-aimed applications.
Exactly what the business does, against each boundary (deposit, security, fund, venue) to fix the correct authorisation and any token classification needed.
The Swiss AG or GmbH, registered office and resident director, and the operating substance the authorisation rests on.
The AML framework, KYC procedures, transaction monitoring, Travel Rule and the fit-and-proper file on the people involved.
The SRO membership or FINMA licence application, lodged and managed through queries to approval.
The continuing compliance function, audits and reporting, and the structure positioned to convert into the 2027 category when it takes effect.
The cost depends entirely on the route. SRO membership for a financial intermediary is materially lighter than a full FINMA licence, and a token issuance or trading venue is heavier still. The drivers are the compliance build, the substance, and which authorisation the activity triggers, not a flat fee.
We scope and quote against your actual model after the mapping step, so the budget reflects the route you genuinely need. Pricing is on request.
Discuss your modelWhatever the route, a Swiss crypto authorisation rests on real foundations:
Marketing across the industry sells “a Swiss crypto licence” as a single, quick product, usually meaning SRO membership. It is real and valuable, but it covers the anti-money-laundering perimeter only. It does not authorise deposit-taking, securities issuance, fund management or running a trading venue, and it does not passport into the EU. Building a business on the assumption that SRO membership covers everything is how projects hit a wall at their first regulated activity. We tell you what each route does and does not permit, before you commit to one.
Crypto regulation is where company law, financial-market law and a shifting reform agenda meet. Mapping a real business across all three, and running the application, is the financial-regulation work we have done since 2014.
The activity tested against every regulatory boundary before an application, so you pursue the authorisation the business actually triggers, not the nearest-sounding one.
The Swiss company, the substance and the regulatory application handled together, so the authorisation is not undermined by a thin structure beneath it.
Today’s launch structured to convert into the crypto-institution or payment instrument category when the reform lands, rather than needing a rebuild.
The written FINMA classification (payment, utility or asset token) that settles whether your token is a security before the token generation event.
Token classificationThe KYC, beneficial-ownership, monitoring, Travel Rule and MROS-reporting framework every Swiss crypto intermediary must run.
VASP AMLThe Swiss AG or GmbH your crypto venture needs first, with the substance a licence application rests on.
Company formationTell us what the business will do. A partner maps it to the right authorisation (SRO or FINMA), forms the entity and substance, and runs the application, with the coming 2027 categories built into the plan.