You can start an AI agency in Switzerland without any licence, permit or registration beyond the commercial register, and Switzerland has no AI statute in force. What governs the business is the data it touches. An AI or digital agency processes personal data on behalf of its clients, routes it through models that are often hosted in the United States, delivers code and content whose ownership is never automatic, and works for European companies whose users the EU AI Act protects across the border. The Swiss Federal Act on Data Protection (FADP) already applies to all of this, and so does the EU regulation as soon as your output is used in the Union. This guide sets out those rules in the order a founder meets them.
Contents
- No licence, no protected title
- No Swiss AI statute, and the FADP already applies
- You process your clients’ customers’ data
- US models and cross-border transfers
- Automated decisions and impact assessments
- The EU AI Act reaches Swiss agencies
- Code, deliverables and AI output: who owns what
- Contracts: delivering a work, selling a retainer
- Company, canton and VAT
- Costly mistakes
- FAQ
No licence, no protected title
No Swiss authority licenses AI agencies, digital agencies or automation consultancies, at federal or cantonal level. You incorporate a company, register it with the commercial register of the canton where it has its seat, and start trading. Titles such as “AI consultant” or “AI expert” are not protected, and no Swiss certification exists for them.
The word “agency” covers two different businesses. A marketing or advertising agency designs campaigns, brand identities and media plans; its legal questions are VAT on services sold abroad, the assignment of its creatives’ rights and unfair competition law, which we cover in our guide on starting a marketing agency in Switzerland. An AI or digital agency builds tools that run on data: websites and apps, integrations between systems, conversational agents, document pipelines, dashboards driven by a language model. That shift moves its legal centre of gravity towards data protection, copyright in code and, since 2026, EU AI law.
If you intend to sell one software product under your own brand to many customers on subscription, you are closer to a software publisher, and the topics change (VAT on electronic services, the patent box, employee equity). Our article on starting a SaaS company in Switzerland covers them. Many agencies end up doing both; each contract should make clear which role you are playing.
No Swiss AI statute, and the FADP already applies
Switzerland has chosen not to adopt a horizontal AI act. On 12 February 2025 the Federal Council decided to ratify the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence, which Switzerland signed on 27 March 2025, and to amend existing laws sector by sector where needed. The Federal Department of Justice and Police is due to put a consultation draft forward by the end of 2026, focused on transparency, data protection, non-discrimination and supervision.
None of this leaves a gap. The Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (FDPIC) has stated, most recently in an update published on 8 May 2025, that the FADP is technology-neutral and therefore applies directly to AI-supported data processing. The FDPIC draws practical consequences from it: the purpose, functioning and data sources of AI processing must be transparent, users of a conversational system have the right to know whether they are talking to a machine, and deepfakes must be clearly identifiable.
You process your clients’ customers’ data
When your agency processes personal data on behalf of a client, it is a processor under Art. 9 FADP and the client remains the controller. CRM records, support tickets, job applications, order histories: anything that passes through your automations falls within this framework. Processing may be assigned to a processor by contract if the data is processed only in the manner in which the client itself would be permitted to do it, and if no statutory or contractual duty of confidentiality prohibits the assignment (Art. 9(1) FADP).
The rule that reshapes an AI agency’s workflow is in paragraph 3: “The processor may only assign processing to a third party with prior approval from the controller.” Sending a client’s data to a language model operated by someone else is precisely such an assignment. Approval must therefore exist before the first API call, not after go-live. In practice, the contract lists the model providers, hosting providers and automation platforms you use, and sets out how you notify the client of changes.
Three further duties come with processor status:
- Security: controllers and processors must ensure data security appropriate to the risk (Art. 8(1) FADP). Access management, logging, and API keys that never end up in a public repository.
- Breaches: the processor notifies the controller as soon as possible of any data security breach (Art. 24(3) FADP); the controller then decides whether to notify the FDPIC.
- Privacy by design and by default: processing is limited by default to what its purpose requires (Art. 7 FADP). An agent that only needs an order number has no business reading the full customer file.
Sanctions under the FADP target individuals, not the company. On complaint, a fine of up to 250,000 francs may be imposed on private persons who wilfully assign processing to a processor without meeting the conditions of Art. 9(1) and (2), disclose data abroad in breach of Art. 16, or fail to comply with the minimum data security requirements (Art. 61 FADP). In a young agency, that person is usually the founder.
Your AI agency in Switzerland
A company your clients can audit before they sign
Choice between GmbH and AG, incorporation and commercial register entry, a registered office in Geneva, Lucerne or Zug, then bookkeeping for recurring retainers, VAT on services sold in Switzerland and abroad, and payroll for your team: My Swiss Company SA incorporates and runs your agency’s Swiss entity while your lawyers draft the processing agreements your clients will ask for.
Scope your project
Swiss Corporate Services Provider in Geneva, Lucerne and Zug, serving clients in more than 20 countries.
US models and cross-border transfers
Most models an AI agency integrates are operated by US companies on servers outside Switzerland. Sending personal data to them is a disclosure abroad, permitted without further safeguards only to a state whose legislation the Federal Council has found adequate (Art. 16(1) FADP). Otherwise you need appropriate safeguards: standard data protection clauses approved or recognised by the FDPIC, contractual clauses notified to the FDPIC beforehand, or binding corporate rules (Art. 16(2) FADP).
The United States appears in Annex 1 of the Data Protection Ordinance (DPO), as in force since 1 December 2025, but only partially: an adequate level of protection is deemed guaranteed for personal data processed by organisations certified under the Swiss-U.S. Data Privacy Framework. Check certification provider by provider, and entity by entity: a group may be certified for one company and not for the subsidiary that invoices you.
| Where the data goes | Legal basis | What the agency should be able to show |
|---|---|---|
| Servers in Switzerland | No disclosure abroad | Processing agreement and the client’s approval of the host |
| EU or EEA | Art. 16(1) FADP, DPO Annex 1 | Same, plus the actual server location |
| United States, provider certified under the Swiss-U.S. DPF | DPO Annex 1, limited to certified organisations | Proof of certification of the processing entity |
| United States, uncertified provider, or any unlisted country | Art. 16(2) FADP | Standard clauses or another safeguard, plus a risk assessment |
Source: Art. 16 FADP (SR 235.1) and DPO Annex 1 (SR 235.11, as at 1 December 2025).
In the opposite direction, Switzerland is an advantage. In its report of 15 January 2024, the European Commission confirmed that Switzerland ensures an adequate level of data protection, so EU companies can entrust personal data to an agency in Geneva, Lucerne or Zug without additional safeguards. They will still require the processor contract that Art. 28(3) GDPR prescribes, and under Art. 28(2) GDPR “the processor shall not engage another processor without prior specific or general written authorisation of the controller”. The GDPR may also apply to your agency directly when the processing relates to offering services to people in the Union or monitoring their behaviour there (Art. 3(2) GDPR), for instance analytics or personalisation you run on a website aimed at German consumers.
Automated decisions and impact assessments
An automation that decides on its own what happens to a person carries specific duties. The controller must inform the data subject “about any decision that is based exclusively on automated processing and that has a legal consequence for or a considerable adverse effect on the data subject” (Art. 21(1) FADP). On request, the person may express their point of view and ask for the decision to be reviewed by a natural person (Art. 21(2)).
Screening job applications, scoring loan requests, rejecting insurance claims or tenancy applications without a human in the loop all fall into this category. Where processing is likely to lead to a high risk, particularly when new technologies are used, the controller must carry out a data protection impact assessment beforehand (Art. 22 FADP). The client is responsible for it, but the agency is the one that knows how the model behaves, so in practice the two write it together. If someone exercises their right of access, the answer must state whether an automated individual decision exists and the logic on which it is based (Art. 25(2)(f) FADP).
The EU AI Act reaches Swiss agencies
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, the AI Act, applies to providers placing AI systems on the EU market “irrespective of whether those providers are established or located within the Union or in a third country”, and to “providers and deployers of AI systems that have their place of establishment or are located in a third country, where the output produced by the AI system is used in the Union” (Art. 2(1)(a) and (c)). The second limb is the one that catches Swiss agencies: whatever your seat, output that ends up with an EU client or EU users brings you into scope.
Take a case that is now common. A British founder sets up a GmbH in Zug that builds lead-qualification agents for German SMEs: the agent writes to inbound prospects by chat and email, asks qualifying questions and books meetings, running on a US-hosted model. The German clients’ prospects must be informed that they are interacting with an AI system, unless that is obvious (Art. 50(1) AI Act). The clients will require a GDPR processor agreement and approve the model provider in writing. The Zug company needs that provider’s Swiss-U.S. DPF certification, or standard clauses, for its own onward transfer, and the client’s prior approval under Art. 9(3) FADP. No Swiss authority has issued anything, yet four regimes govern the project.
Who is the “provider”? The regulation defines it as the person that “develops an AI system or a general-purpose AI model or that has an AI system or a general-purpose AI model developed and places it on the market or puts the AI system into service under its own name or trademark” (Art. 3(3)). If each German client deploys the agent under its own brand, the client is in principle the provider and your agency the developer. If you sell the same agent under your brand to thirty clients, you are the provider. The contract should say which it is.
The timetable moved in the summer of 2026, but not for transparency. Regulation (EU) 2026/1744 of 8 July 2026, the “digital omnibus on AI” published in the Official Journal on 24 July 2026, pushed obligations for high-risk systems under Annex III to 2 December 2027 and under Annex I to 2 August 2028. Article 50 has applied since 2 August 2026; only providers of generative systems already on the market before that date have until 2 December 2026 to comply with the machine-readable marking duty in Art. 50(2). The omnibus also rewrote the AI literacy duty in Art. 4: providers and deployers “shall take measures to support the development of AI literacy of their staff”, and the obligation “does not require providers or deployers to guarantee any specific level of AI literacy of any individual”.
My Swiss Company’s view
Map your clients before you map your tools. A Swiss agency serving only Swiss clients sits under the FADP alone; the first contract with a client in Munich or Lyon brings in the GDPR and the AI Act. Founders who set up the processing agreement template, the sub-processor list and the AI disclosure wording once, at incorporation, sign their first EU client in days rather than weeks.
Code, deliverables and AI output: who owns what
Swiss copyright protects “literary and artistic intellectual creations with individual character, irrespective of their value or purpose” (Art. 2(1) Copyright Act), and expressly treats computer programs as works (Art. 2(3)). Three situations arise in an agency, each with a different answer.
Code written by employees
“Where a computer program has been created under an employment contract in the course of discharging professional duties and in fulfilling contractual obligations, the employer alone shall be entitled to exercise the exclusive rights of use” (Art. 17 Copyright Act). For your salaried developers, the agency can license or assign the code onwards.
Code written by freelancers
Article 17 only covers employees. A freelance developer, in Switzerland or abroad, keeps the rights in what they write until they assign them in writing, and “the assignment of a right subsisting in the copyright does not include the assignment of other partial rights, unless such was agreed” (Art. 16(2)). An agency promising its client ownership of code it never acquired from its freelancers is promising something it does not have.
AI-generated output
The Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property (IPI) is clear that copyright in Switzerland only protects works created by a human being. Where a person uses the tool as an instrument and supplies the creative effort, the result may be protected; where the creative act is performed by the machine, it is not. What is not protected cannot be assigned: a clause by which the agency “assigns all rights” gives the client no exclusivity over images or text produced without human creative input. The IPI adds that whoever uses generated content that infringes a third party’s copyright infringes it too.
The contract therefore needs to state what was generated, with which tool and under which licence terms of that tool, what was reworked by a person, and who warrants that no third-party rights are infringed.
Contracts: delivering a work, selling a retainer
An AI or digital agency usually signs two kinds of contract, and the Swiss Code of Obligations treats them differently. A website, app or automation delivered by an agreed date is generally a work contract, “whereby the contractor undertakes to produce a piece of work and the customer undertakes to pay the contractor for that work” (Art. 363 CO). The client inspects the work on delivery and reports defects; if the work is unusable it may refuse it, and for minor defects it may reduce the price or require rectification (Art. 367 and 368 CO).
Ongoing support, optimisation and advice look more like a mandate, under which the mandatee undertakes to “provide certain services in accordance with the terms of the contract” (Art. 394(1) CO). And “the mandate may be revoked or terminated at any time by either party” (Art. 404(1) CO), with compensation due only where termination occurs at an inopportune juncture (Art. 404(2)). If your twelve-month retainer is qualified as a mandate, the client can end it next month whatever the contract says. The way out is structure rather than tougher wording: a work delivered, accepted and paid as such, then a support arrangement whose value is visible every month. Qualification depends on what the contract actually provides, so have it reviewed by a Swiss lawyer before your first signature.
Company, canton and VAT
Most AI agencies start as a GmbH (Sàrl), with share capital of CHF 20,000 fully paid in. An AG (SA), with share capital of CHF 100,000 of which at least CHF 50,000 must be paid in, makes sense once investors come in or large clients expect a more substantial counterparty; see our page on the public limited company in Switzerland. Limited liability does not shield the founder from FADP fines, which target individuals. The incorporation steps are set out in our guide to the incorporation of a company in Switzerland.
The canton follows your clients and your team: Geneva for international and French-speaking clients, Zug and Lucerne for central and German-speaking Switzerland. On VAT, services to clients established abroad are in principle outside Swiss VAT under the place-of-recipient rule. Purchases deserve attention: once the agency is VAT-registered, services it buys from foreign suppliers not registered in Switzerland are subject to reverse-charge acquisition tax; before registration, telecom and electronic services are excluded (the foreign supplier must register itself), while other foreign services become taxable above CHF 10,000 a year (Art. 45 VAT Act). Our overview of VAT in Switzerland explains the registration thresholds.
Costly mistakes
- Plugging in a model before the client approves it: chained sub-processing without prior approval is exactly what Art. 9(3) FADP prohibits.
- Assuming a US provider is “covered”: only Swiss-U.S. DPF certification of the processing entity makes the transfer adequate.
- Assigning what you do not own: freelancers’ code without a written assignment, AI output without human creative input.
- Confusing your seat with your market: the AI Act asks where output is used, not where you are incorporated.
- Booking a long retainer as secured revenue: if it is a mandate, it is revocable at any time.
- Advertising an “AI certification” or “guaranteed AI Act compliance”: no such Swiss certification exists, and inaccurate claims in a commercial offer are unfair competition.
FAQ: starting an AI agency in Switzerland
Do you need a licence to start an AI agency in Switzerland?
No. No federal or cantonal licence is required to run an AI or digital agency in Switzerland, and titles such as AI consultant are not protected. The company registers with the commercial register like any GmbH or AG. The obligations of the business come from the Federal Act on Data Protection, copyright law, the Code of Obligations and, for EU clients, the GDPR and Regulation (EU) 2024/1689.
Does Switzerland have an AI law?
Not yet. On 12 February 2025 the Federal Council decided to ratify the Council of Europe Framework Convention on AI and to amend existing laws sector by sector; a consultation draft is expected by the end of 2026. Meanwhile, the FDPIC considers the FADP directly applicable to AI-supported data processing.
Does the EU AI Act apply to a Swiss agency?
Yes, when the agency places an AI system on the EU market or when the output of a system it provides or deploys is used in the Union (Art. 2(1)(a) and (c) of Regulation 2024/1689). The transparency duties in Article 50 have applied since 2 August 2026. The digital omnibus of 8 July 2026 postponed high-risk obligations to 2 December 2027 and 2 August 2028, not transparency.
Can a Swiss agency send client data to a US AI model?
Yes, if two conditions are met. The client must have approved that sub-processor in advance (Art. 9(3) FADP), and the transfer must be covered: either the provider is certified under the Swiss-U.S. Data Privacy Framework, the only case in which DPO Annex 1 treats the United States as adequate, or standard clauses or another safeguard under Art. 16(2) FADP are in place.
Who owns AI-generated content in Switzerland?
Nobody, in copyright terms, if there is no human creative contribution: according to the IPI, Swiss copyright only protects works created by a human being. Output can be protected where a person uses the tool as an instrument and supplies the creative effort. Agency contracts should therefore describe what was generated, what was reworked and who bears the risk of infringing third-party rights.
Can a client cancel a monthly retainer at any time?
If the retainer is qualified as a mandate, yes: under Art. 404(1) of the Code of Obligations either party may revoke a mandate at any time, and compensation is due only for termination at an inopportune juncture. A minimum term written into the contract does not change this. Separating the delivered work (a work contract under Art. 363 CO) from monthly support makes revenue more predictable.
Sources
- Federal Act on Data Protection (FADP), SR 235.1
- Data Protection Ordinance (DPO), SR 235.11, Annex 1
- FDPIC, current data protection legislation is directly applicable to AI (update of 8 May 2025)
- FDPIC, EU adequacy decision regarding Switzerland, 15 January 2024
- OFCOM, artificial intelligence: Federal Council decision of 12 February 2025
- Copyright Act, SR 231.1
- IPI, AI tools and copyright, 17 February 2023
- Code of Obligations (CO), SR 220
- Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act)
- Regulation (EU) 2026/1744 (digital omnibus on AI), OJ of 24 July 2026
- Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR), Articles 3 and 28
- Federal Act on Value Added Tax, SR 641.20
Conclusion
Starting an AI agency in Switzerland is administratively light and legally demanding. Nobody will ask you for a permit, but your clients will ask, earlier every year, for a processing agreement, your list of model providers, proof of their transfer safeguards, a straight answer on who owns the code and the content, and your reading of the AI Act for their European users. The agency that can answer sells better than the one that promises compliance it has not checked. My Swiss Company, a Swiss Corporate Services Provider with offices in Geneva and Lucerne and a presence in Zug, incorporates and administers agencies for founders from more than 20 countries, so that the structure reflects how their contracts actually work.
