Article published by Oc\u00e9ane Gygax on 30 September 2026.<\/p>\n
The Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA, SR 955.0) aims to prevent the use of the financial and economic system for money laundering or terrorist financing purposes, by imposing on the persons concerned duties of due diligence, documentation and, where applicable, reporting to the competent authorities.<\/p>\n
On 1 October 2026<\/strong>, a revision of this Act enters into force. For the first time, advisers<\/strong> who take part, on a professional basis, in real estate transactions are directly subject to the requirements of the AMLA. The reform has far-reaching consequences for internal organisation, the management of mandates and transactional procedures. The time to act is short, as some steps cannot be postponed.<\/p>\n Article 2 para. 1 let. c AMLA creates this new category of persons subject to the Act. An adviser is any person who takes part, on a professional basis and on behalf of a third party, in financial transactions connected with certain legal operations defined by the Act, first and foremost the purchase and sale of real estate<\/strong>, as well as the formation, management or domiciliation of non-operational legal entities (Art. 2 para. 3bis AMLA).<\/p>\n This approach, based on the nature of the activity rather than on professional status, is the true paradigm shift of the reform. The profession exercised is irrelevant; only the service actually provided matters. Potentially affected are therefore lawyers, notaries, fiduciaries, accountants, brokers, real estate developers, financing advisers and family offices<\/strong>, as soon as they take part in a real estate transaction within the meaning of the Act.<\/p>\n The new regime requires the advisory activity to be carried out on a professional basis. According to the draft Anti-Money Laundering Ordinance (D-AMLO), “advice provided on a professional basis” would be an “independent economic activity aimed at generating income” (Art. 12f para. 1 D-AMLO). Article 7 AMLO sets out several situations in which the activity is deemed to be carried out on a professional basis: where the adviser generates gross income of more than CHF 50,000<\/strong> per year from the activity concerned, where he or she advises more than 20 clients<\/strong> or takes part in more than 20 legal transactions per calendar year, where the advisory activity relates to assets with a total value exceeding CHF 5 million<\/strong>, or where it relates to legal transactions with an annual volume exceeding CHF 2 million<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Article 2 para. 1 let. c in conjunction with para. 3bis applies to advisers in the following cases:<\/p>\n There are nevertheless general exceptions<\/strong> for real estate transactions (Art. 2 para. 4 AMLA), in particular for transactions governed by family law, matrimonial property law or inheritance law; transfers with a value below CHF 5 million where the price is paid exclusively through an institution already subject to the AMLA; the acquisition of a dwelling intended for the purchaser’s own use; transfers of agricultural property to a farmer; and land consolidation operations.<\/p>\n The adviser must verify the identity of the client and identify the beneficial owner (Art. 8b para. 1 let. a and b AMLA), and establish the object and purpose of the intended transaction (Art. 8b para. 2 AMLA). These steps must be recorded in documents enabling a qualified third party to form an opinion on the transaction and on compliance with legal obligations (Art. 8b para. 1 let. c AMLA). Where a file presents an increased risk (a complex structure without apparent economic justification, a connection with a high-risk country, the involvement of a politically exposed person, the absence of personal contact with the client, or an unusual volume), further clarifications must be carried out and documented (Art. 8b para. 3 AMLA).<\/p>\n The precise scope of these obligations will not be set by federal ordinance but delegated to the regulations of the self-regulatory organisation (SRO) with which the adviser is affiliated (Art. 8c para. 2 and 25 para. 2 AMLA). This delegation may lead to varying standards depending on the SRO concerned.<\/p>\n The adviser must put in place the organisational measures required to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing in the course of his or her activity (Art. 8d AMLA), in particular the adoption of internal directives, a structured verification process at the opening of each mandate, documentation accessible to a qualified auditor, ongoing staff training and regular internal controls. These organisational requirements must remain proportionate to the scale and risk profile of the activity concerned (Art. 8c para. 1 AMLA), so as not to impose on smaller firms a structure disproportionate to that required of financial intermediaries.<\/p>\n The adviser must inform the Money Laundering Reporting Office Switzerland (MROS) without delay in the event of a reasonable suspicion (Art. 9 para. 1ter let. g AMLA). For lawyers and notaries acting as advisers, however, this duty applies only where two conditions are cumulatively met: the execution of a financial transaction on behalf of the client, and the absence of protection of the information concerned by professional secrecy<\/strong> (Art. 9 para. 2 AMLA, Art. 321 Swiss Criminal Code). Insofar as the bulk of legal advisory activity remains typical of the profession, and therefore covered by professional secrecy under the settled case law of the Federal Supreme Court, this dual condition should in practice exempt a large proportion of lawyers active in the real estate field from the reporting duty.<\/p>\n Any adviser falling within the scope of the AMLA must become affiliated with an SRO recognised by FINMA<\/strong> (Art. 14 para. 1 AMLA) within two months of commencing the activity concerned. A lawyer already affiliated with an SRO in respect of his or her activity as a financial intermediary must affiliate with the same organisation for his or her advisory activity (Art. 12a para. 2 AMLA).<\/p>\n It should be stressed that no transitional period is provided<\/strong> for the due diligence obligations themselves. Persons already carrying out an advisory activity within the meaning of the AMLA on 1 October 2026 must comply from that date, including for ongoing mandates. Only affiliation with an SRO benefits from a two-month period.<\/p>\n It is recommended to carry out without delay a systematic review of the mandate portfolio in order to identify transactions falling within the statutory catalogue, in particular with regard to the CHF 5 million threshold; to select an SRO and prepare the affiliation application; to implement the necessary internal processes for identification, documentation and training; and to monitor closely the development of SRO regulations, the final version of which is not yet available.<\/p>\n 1 October 2026 does not merely mark the entry into force of a law: for many players in the real estate sector, it marks the entry into a new regime of responsibility, in which the activity carried out now takes precedence over professional status, and this without any adaptation period.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" From 1 October 2026, advisers taking part in real estate transactions are directly subject to the AMLA: who is concerned, obligations, SRO affiliation, deadlines.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":17114,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[266],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-19207","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-legal-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mcelegal.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19207","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mcelegal.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mcelegal.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mcelegal.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mcelegal.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=19207"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/mcelegal.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19207\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":19213,"href":"https:\/\/mcelegal.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19207\/revisions\/19213"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mcelegal.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/17114"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mcelegal.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19207"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mcelegal.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19207"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mcelegal.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19207"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}I. Definition of adviser<\/h2>\n
II. Scope of the AMLA<\/h2>\n
\n
III. Consequences for advisers in real estate matters<\/h2>\n
A. Due diligence obligations<\/h3>\n
B. Organisational obligations<\/h3>\n
C. Duty to report to MROS<\/h3>\n
D. Mandatory affiliation with a self-regulatory organisation<\/h3>\n
IV. Practical recommendations<\/h2>\n
V. Conclusion<\/h2>\n