History. 5 of 6: in five of six bank laws from 2010 to 2013, the second chamber kept or tightened the first chamber's capital or structure rules; in Switzerland in 2011 it softened them.
Hunch. The Swiss People's Party, which holds 67 of the 200 National Council seats, called the rule out of proportion in January.
The National Council market resolves on the Swiss Parliament page for business 26.027: YES if the National Council, in its first vote on the law by 18 December 2026, keeps 90% or more hard capital behind foreign banks with no softening, and NO if it softens, rejects or refuses the law. Softening covers a lower share, fewer banks, a longer transition, a new compulsory discount or exception, or a new way to value the foreign banks that lowers the capital needed; with no National Council vote by 18 December the market is VOID, and swissinfo and Reuters are the backups.
We looked for cases where one chamber of a national parliament passed tougher rules for big banks, on their capital or on how they are organised, and the second chamber then voted on that text. We found six such votes from 2010 to 2013, in Switzerland, the US, the UK, France and Germany. All six laws passed in the end. Five times the second chamber kept the rules or made them tougher. Once, in Switzerland in 2011, it softened them.