Fari­nel­li Moti­on (26.3591): Fede­ral Legal Basis for the Inter­can­to­nal Exch­an­ge of Infor­ma­ti­on in Cases of Frau­du­lent Bankruptcies

Sub­mit­ted text

The Fede­ral Coun­cil is direc­ted to sub­mit a legis­la­ti­ve amend­ment to Par­lia­ment to estab­lish a clear legal basis so that the com­pe­tent fede­ral and can­to­nal aut­ho­ri­ties, when abu­si­ve bank­rupt­ci­es, Insol­ven­cy Chains or eco­no­mic­al­ly equi­va­lent new busi­nesses that lead to Los­ses bor­ne by the public sec­tor could lead to the neces­sa­ry Exch­an­ge infor­ma­ti­on may. In doing so, due con­side­ra­ti­on must be given to pro­por­tio­na­li­ty and data protection.

In par­ti­cu­lar, the draft should spe­ci­fy which aut­ho­ri­ties are aut­ho­ri­zed to trans­mit and recei­ve infor­ma­ti­on, and defi­ne the scope of the data that may be exch­an­ged as well as the per­mis­si­ble purposes.

Justi­fi­ca­ti­on

The latest reforms aimed at com­ba­ting «chain bank­rupt­ci­es» are a step in the right direc­tion. Howe­ver, the Fede­ral Coun­cil its­elf has noted that their effec­ti­ve­ness can­not be asses­sed until seve­ral years have pas­sed and that signi­fi­cant tech­ni­cal delays remain, par­ti­cu­lar­ly with regard to the cen­tral data­ba­se of indi­vi­du­als listed in the can­to­nal regi­sters and with regard to sear­ching for indi­vi­du­als in Zefix.

In prac­ti­ce, the­r­e­fo­re, a key pro­blem per­sists: Files on indi­vi­du­als invol­ved in pro­ble­ma­tic bank­rupt­cy pro­ce­e­dings may be held in dif­fe­rent can­tons and by dif­fe­rent aut­ho­ri­ties. This makes it dif­fi­cult to pre­vent fur­ther los­ses to the public sec­tor, for exam­p­le with regard to tax and social secu­ri­ty claims, sub­si­dies, finan­cial assi­stance, gua­ran­tees, or public procurement.

The mat­ter has beco­me even more deli­ca­te sin­ce the new regu­la­ti­on took effect on Janu­ary 1, 2025; this is becau­se claims under public law against debtors listed in the com­mer­cial regi­ster must now also be asser­ted as part of bank­rupt­cy proceedings.

The goal is neither to crea­te new blan­ket black­lists nor to impo­se bureau­cra­tic hurd­les on repu­ta­ble com­pa­nies. Rather, the goal is to pro­vi­de the aut­ho­ri­ties with a clear legal basis that enables them to, to exch­an­ge infor­ma­ti­on, whe­re war­ran­ted, to pro­tect tax­payers, pre­vent abu­se, and ensu­re fair com­pe­ti­ti­ve con­di­ti­ons are abso­lut­e­ly necessary.