Sanctions Screening in Real Estate Transactions in Switzerland

A conceivable scenario: a property changes hands, the purchase price travels through several accounts, and the buyer is a company with foreign owners. For real estate agents, property managers, project developers, trustees and family offices, the same question arises in such situations: whom do I have to screen, and against which lists?

Since 1 October 2026 the situation has also been in flux: the revised Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) now covers certain advisers, including in real estate. This article explains who may be affected, what role sanctions law plays and how sanctions screening in real estate transactions can sensibly be organised.

In brief: What applies in real estate transactions?

Since 1 October 2026, advisers who professionally participate in purchases and sales of land are also subject to the Anti-Money Laundering Act. Whether this applies to a given company depends on its specific activity and on the individual transaction. Regardless of this, the law requires them to take organisational measures against violations of coercive measures under the Embargo Act. Sanctions screening of the parties involved can be one building block, but it does not replace an assessment of the individual case.

Note: This article is for general information and is not legal advice. Whether and to what extent the AMLA or sanctions law applies to a company or a transaction depends on the individual case. Every company remains responsible for its own compliance.

Key points

• The revised AMLA has also applied since 1 October 2026 to advisers who professionally participate in certain legal transactions, for example the purchase and sale of land.
• Not every real estate agent and not every transaction is covered. What matters are the specific activity, whether it is carried out professionally and the statutory exceptions.
• Advisers must join a self-regulatory organisation (SRO). Anyone who was already active on 1 October 2026 must submit an application by 1 December 2026.
• Sanctions are a legal field in their own right: Switzerland implements them through the Embargo Act, and SECO is responsible for enforcement and supervision. EU sanctions do not apply automatically in Switzerland.
• Documented sanctions screening of the parties involved, including the beneficial owners, is a practical means of recognising sanctions risks early.

Why sanctions can matter in real estate transactions

Real estate transactions can involve high values, several parties and, in some cases, companies or financing structures in the background. Anyone who does not know the buyer, the seller or their financiers cannot judge whether a sanctions measure is affected. Sanctions screening therefore compares names with sanctions lists and makes possible hits visible before a transaction is concluded.

The distinction is important: anti-money laundering law and sanctions law pursue different aims and rest on different statutes. They do touch each other in everyday practice, however, because both require the identity of the parties involved to be established.

What changed on 1 October 2026?

Parliament adopted the amendment to the Anti-Money Laundering Act on 26 September 2025. The referendum period expired unused on 15 January 2026. On 12 June 2026 the Federal Council decided to bring the revised AMLA and the new Act on the transparency of legal entities into force on 1 October 2026 (press release of the Federal Council, in German). The provisions on official notary offices are excluded.

The AMLA now covers advisers in addition to financial intermediaries and dealers. The Money Laundering Reporting Office Switzerland (MROS) at the Federal Office of Police fedpol points out that they are therefore subject to the due diligence obligations of the Act and must file a report where money laundering is suspected.

Who is affected as an adviser?

Advisers are natural persons and legal entities that professionally participate, for third parties, in financial transactions, including the raising of funds, in connection with certain legal transactions (Art. 2 para. 3bis AMLA). In real estate, two of these legal transactions are in the foreground:

• the purchase and sale of land;
• the purchase and sale of legal entities, where the purchase or sale is carried out by a non-operating legal entity.

Other legal transactions concern companies, in particular their formation, management and administration as well as contributions and distributions, where non-operating legal entities are concerned.

What does “participation” mean?

The Anti-Money Laundering Ordinance (AMLO) specifies: participation is advice that makes a causal contribution to a legal transaction connected with a financial transaction (Art. 12d AMLO). According to the joint interpretation guide of the self-regulatory organisations (in German), prepared in coordination with the State Secretariat for International Finance (SIF), the obligations only apply once the activity has a sufficient link to a specific transaction. Merely publishing listings on a portal is, according to that guide, not covered. The guide is not legally binding.

Which land transactions are meant?

Covered are the purchase and sale of a plot of land within the meaning of Art. 655 para. 2 of the Civil Code. This also includes legal transactions that economically have the same effect as a purchase or sale in terms of control over the property, as well as the encumbrance of land with a usufruct or a building right against payment (Art. 12e AMLO). The activity is covered as soon as both parties have declared their intention to conclude the purchase contract and no exception applies.

When is advice “professional”?

Advice is professional if it is an independent economic activity aimed at lasting income. In any case it is professional if one of the following thresholds is reached (Art. 12f AMLO):

It does not matter whether the advice is a main or a secondary activity. According to the interpretation guide, professional status is assessed on the basis of the person.

Not every agent, not every transaction

The law expressly excludes certain situations (Art. 2 para. 4ter AMLA). These include, among others:

• transactions resulting from family, marriage and matrimonial property law, inheritance law or gifts, and between closely connected persons;
• transfers of land and legal entities with a value below five million francs, provided the purchase price is paid and received exclusively through banks or other financial intermediaries subject to the Act;
• the purchase of owner-occupied residential property in Switzerland or of replacement property;
• the transfer of agricultural holdings or land to persons who farm it themselves;
• pure notarisation without ancillary advisory activity.

The five-million threshold is therefore not a general lower limit: it only has effect if, in addition, the purchase price flows exclusively through banks or financial intermediaries subject to the Act.

The interpretation guide of the SROs and the SIF gives further examples. According to it, the mere management of condominium ownership, including the administration of a renewal fund, is not covered as long as the manager does not take part in a sale. If the manager takes part in the sales process, they are covered. In the case of a disposal of shares in a real estate company, coverage requires the transfer of a majority holding. Anyone who secures a property on their own account and lets investors join on fixed terms is not covered as an adviser; anyone who acts for third parties or a consortium, or negotiates the terms, may be.

For property managers, project developers and family offices this means that the question can only be answered per activity and per transaction.

Delimitation from financial intermediation

Where the same activity counts both as financial intermediation and as advice, the provisions for financial intermediaries apply (Art. 2b AMLA). Anyone who accepts or manages client funds, for example, may already be subject to the Act as a financial intermediary under previous law. In that case the new adviser provisions do not apply additionally. The delimitation should be examined in the individual case.

Which obligations apply to advisers?

Under the AMLA, advisers must in essence do the following:

• Identify the customer (Art. 8b para. 1 let. a AMLA);
• establish the beneficial owner (Art. 8b para. 1 let. b AMLA);
• keep records (Art. 8b para. 1 let. c AMLA);
• identify the subject matter and purpose of the requested transaction (Art. 8b para. 2 AMLA);
• clarify the background where this is justified in view of high risks (Art. 8b para. 3 AMLA);
• take organisational measures, including adequate training of staff and controls (Art. 8d AMLA);
• report to MROS where they know or have reasonable grounds to suspect money laundering, terrorist financing or corresponding assets (Art. 9 para. 1ter AMLA). MROS requires suspicious activity reports to be submitted electronically through the goAML information system.

The extent of the due diligence obligations is regulated by the relevant SRO, which provides for simplified or enhanced obligations depending on the risk (Art. 8c AMLA). According to the interpretation guide (which is not legally binding), due diligence in real estate brokerage must be completed before the purchase contract is concluded before the notary.

SRO membership and deadlines

Advisers must join a self-regulatory organisation (Art. 14 para. 1 AMLA). The SRO supervises compliance with the obligations (Art. 12 let. d AMLA). FINMA maintains a public register of the affiliated persons (Art. 18b AMLA). FINMA provides guidance on the revision.

The following transitional rules apply under the AMLO:

• Anyone who is active as an adviser on 1 October 2026 must submit an application for membership of an SRO by 1 December 2026. Until the decision, the activity may only be carried out within the framework of existing business relationships.
• Financial intermediaries who are additionally active as advisers on 1 October 2026 must notify this activity to the competent supervisory authority or organisation by 1 December 2026. For persons supervised by FINMA, FINMA provides a notification form for this purpose.
• Anyone who only later exceeds the threshold for professional activity must comply with the obligations immediately and, within two months, submit an application for membership or notify the activity (Art. 12g AMLO).

Beneficial owners and the transparency register

Establishing the beneficial owner is a central due diligence obligation. Advisers can also access data of the new transparency register online, to the extent that these data are necessary for fulfilling their due diligence obligations (Art. 27 of the Transparency Act, in the version amended by the AMLA amendment). Establishing the beneficial owner remains a due diligence obligation of the adviser themselves (Art. 8b para. 1 let. b AMLA); details are regulated by the relevant SRO.

For sanctions screening this is important, because not only the direct contracting party but also the persons in the background can be relevant.

Sanctions law: the Embargo Act and the role of SECO

Swiss sanctions are based on the Embargo Act. The Federal Council issues the measures in ordinances, and SECO is responsible for enforcement and supervision. According to SECO, it is in principle the responsibility of companies and other parties concerned to comply with sanctions (SECO: Frequently asked questions on sanctions, in German). How the Swiss list is structured is explained in the article SECO sanctions list explained.

Two points are important in practice:

• UN sanctions must be applied by Switzerland as a member of the United Nations.
• EU sanctions do not apply automatically in Switzerland. The Federal Council decides case by case whether Switzerland adopts them in full, in part or not at all. Swiss sanctions therefore follow those of the EU with a delay. More on this in the article EU Sanctions List: What Swiss Companies Need to Know.

The revised AMLA links the two areas at one point: advisers take the organisational measures that are necessary to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing as well as violations of coercive measures under the Embargo Act (Art. 8d AMLA). The law itself does not prescribe a particular method; details are regulated by the relevant SRO in its rules. Documented sanctions screening is, in practice, an obvious means, but it does not replace an assessment of the individual case.

Sanctions screening in real estate transactions in practice

Whom to screen?

Depending on the transaction, the following come into question:

• buyer and seller;
• represented persons and authorised representatives;
• companies, foundations or trusts and their beneficial owners;
• management and board members of the companies involved;
• other parties, such as financiers or project partners, to the extent they are known.

When to screen?

Screening makes sense before conclusion, at the latest before the parties have the purchase contract notarised. For longer-running projects or business relationships, repetition is worthwhile because sanctions lists change continuously.

Against which lists?

For Swiss companies, the SECO list is the starting point. Depending on the connection of the transaction, the EU sanctions list, the OFAC list, the UK Sanctions List and the UN list can be added. The lists do not fully overlap, which is why many companies screen several sources. Which lists are required in a given case must be decided by the company on the basis of its risk profile. An overview is provided in the article Which Sanctions Lists Matter for Swiss Companies?

Handling hits correctly

A hit is initially only a possible match. It must be clarified whether the same person is meant or only a similarity of names exists. In the case of a confirmed hit, the applicable requirements must be examined professionally and, where necessary, legally. Where money laundering is suspected, the reporting obligations under the AMLA must also be observed.

Documentation

Independently of the statutory documentation obligation under the AMLA (Art. 7), it makes sense in practice to record the sanctions screening as well: date of the check, party checked, lists taken into account and their status, result, assessment and responsible person. Such documentation helps with enquiries, for example from banks or the SRO.

Delimitation from PEP screening

Sanctions screening is not the same as PEP screening. Sanctions lists name persons and organisations against which measures have been imposed; PEP screening is about politically exposed persons. A person can be on one list without appearing on the other. The difference is explained in the article PEP list vs. sanctions list. Whether PEP screening is required for a specific company depends on the applicable rules and on the rules of the competent SRO.

Typical mistakes in practice

• Screening only the direct contracting party and leaving out beneficial owners;
• carrying out the screening only after notarisation;
• using only one list;
• ignoring name variants and spellings;
• not documenting results;
• assuming that the five-million threshold automatically releases from obligations;
• assuming that every real estate activity, or none, is covered without checking the specific activity.

How does sanctioncheck.ch help?

sanctioncheck.ch is a platform with which companies can screen individuals, companies and organisations against the sanctions sources available on the platform at the time of the check. Which sources are offered is shown on the home page; the PDF screening report shows the data status of the sources as stored at the time of the check. Sanctions screening is available on the home page, and the prices are publicly available. The platform supports sanctions screening and its documentation. It replaces neither the assessment of whether a company is subject to the AMLA, nor SRO membership, nor the due diligence obligations under the AMLA, nor legal advice. Responsibility for compliance with legal requirements remains with the company.

Conclusion

With the AMLA revision, real estate agents, property managers, project developers, trustees and family offices face a new task: they must clarify whether their specific activity counts as advice under the AMLA. There are no blanket answers, because it depends on the activity, whether it is professional and the exceptions. Independently of this, sanctions law remains a separate set of obligations, in which SECO enforces the Swiss measures and EU sanctions do not apply automatically.

Anyone who screens the parties involved and the beneficial owners systematically against several sanctions lists, documents the results and sets out responsibilities clearly creates a solid foundation. In case of doubt, the advice of a specialist or an enquiry with the competent SRO is recommended.

Further topics

• EU Sanctions List: What Swiss Companies Need to Know
• Which Sanctions Lists Matter for Swiss Companies?
• What Is Sanctions Screening?
• SECO sanctions list explained
• OFAC sanctions list explained
• PEP list vs. sanctions list: the difference

Official sources

The information on the legal position is based on the following sources (status of the source check: 11 October 2026). The Swiss legislation is available in the official languages German, French and Italian; the English terms used here are for information only.

• Fedlex: Amendment of the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 26 September 2025 (BBl 2025 2899) (German)
• Fedlex: Anti-Money Laundering Ordinance (SR 955.01) (German)
• Federal Council: press release of 12 June 2026 (German)
• FINMA: Notes on the revision of the AMLA and the AMLO
• SIF: Anti-Money Laundering Act (German)
• fedpol: Money laundering and MROS (German)
• SECO: Frequently asked questions on sanctions (German)
• Joint interpretation guide of the SROs in coordination with the SIF: FAQ on advisory activity (German, not legally binding)