Swiss parliamentary committee has made a decision on UBS's (UBSG SW) capital requirements

The UBS capital debate has run through Swiss politics since the Credit Suisse rescue, with the central question being how much of the foreign subsidiary capital must be held in CET1. A full-CET1 outcome had been the punitive scenario under discussion; splitting the requirement evenly between CET1 and AT1 is materially softer than that, since AT1 is cheaper to issue and does not dilute shareholders. Prior form in this process is that committee proposals are an early waypoint, not the final word: the full parliament and the government retain the ability to amend, and bank capital packages of this kind have historically been negotiated down, delayed, or phased in over long implementation windows. The distinction that matters for the equity story is CET1 versus total capital: every percentage point shifted into AT1 reduces the feared dilution and the retained-earnings drag, which is why the composition, not just the headline ratio, drives the share reaction. Worth watching are the positions of the other parliamentary chambers, the finance ministry and the regulator, and whether the final package preserves this split or reverts toward the harder CET1-heavy versions previously floated. As a committee-stage proposal rather than enacted law, the signal is directional on the trajectory of the regime, not definitive on the end state.