The Swiss Federal Gaming Board (Eidgenössische Spielbankenkommission – ESBK) has issued a formal clarification regarding the prosecution of “strafbare Handlungen” (punishable acts) under the Federal Act on Money Games (BGS). The directive explicitly moves beyond corporate fines, outlining the framework under which individual board members, directors, and high-level executives of offshore companies can be held personally liable for administrative and criminal penalties. By targeting the leadership of entities operating without a Swiss concession, the ESBK aims to dismantle the commercial incentive for unauthorised market entry.
Operational Fallout: The Personal Risk Profile for Offshore Executives
The ESBK’s renewed focus on individual accountability introduces a significant legal deterrent for international operators. For C-suite executives and compliance departments, the following strategic takeaways are critical:
- Direct Individual Prosecution: Under Article 131 of the BGS, individuals who intentionally provide, organise, or make available online gambling without a licence face imprisonment of up to three years or monetary penalties. The ESBK has confirmed that “omission of supervision” by board members is a prosecutable offence.
- Asset Forfeiture and Professional Bans: Beyond personal fines, the ESBK maintains the authority to confiscate “illegal gains” generated from Swiss residents. Furthermore, criminal convictions in Switzerland can trigger professional disqualifications across other European regulated jurisdictions.
- Enforcement of the Federal Monopoly: This legal pressure coincides with a period of market stabilisation, as Switzerland now operates with 10 online casino licences issued by the ESBK for 2026, leaving no room for “grey market” tolerance from the regulator.
- Secondary Liability for Affiliates: The ESBK’s guidance clarifies that marketing and payment processing partners who “materially assist” unlicensed operations are also subject to criminal proceedings, extending the risk to the entire supply chain.
Closing the Loopholes: Switzerland’s Dual-Track Enforcement Strategy
The ESBK’s strategy for 2026 relies on a “pincer movement” of technical blocks and legal prosecution. While criminal charges target the individuals behind the companies, the regulator continues to aggressively restrict access to the platforms themselves.
This enforcement shift is evidenced by the continuous expansion of the ISP blocklist. The move to target directors follows the recent announcement that Switzerland has added 376 new domains to its gambling blacklist—a tactical escalation designed to exhaust the technical and financial resources of offshore providers. By pairing automated domain blocking with the explicit threat of personal criminal records for executives, the ESBK is moving to make the Swiss market ‘operationally unviable’ for any entity operating outside the federal concession system.
The ESBK notes that ignorance of Swiss law is not a defence. Any entity that allows Swiss IP addresses to access real-money games without an ESBK licence is deemed to be acting with “eventual intent” (Eventualvorsatz), thereby satisfying the criteria for criminal prosecution of the company’s leadership.
The Cost of Ignoring Swiss Exclusion and Licensing Data
For legitimate licensees, the ESBK’s crackdown provides a competitive advantage by removing “tax-free” competition. However, it also raises the bar for internal compliance. The ESBK has signalled that even licensed operators could face administrative proceedings if their CRM systems fail to properly geofence or exclude players in accordance with federal social protection mandates.
The regulator is particularly focused on “advertising for unauthorised games”. Directors of media houses and affiliate networks have been put on notice: facilitating the visibility of a blacklisted domain is considered a violation of Article 131.
As Switzerland moves into the second half of 2026, the ESBK has hinted at increased cooperation with international law enforcement agencies to execute cross-border subpoenas. This signals that the “Swiss Shield” is no longer just a technical barrier but a proactive legal framework designed to hold the global iGaming boardroom accountable for local violations.