Regulation (EC) No 883/2004

(As of 1 June)

The Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council is part of the Agreement on the Free Movement of Persons (AFMP) between Switzerland and the European Union (EU). This Regulation is listed in Annex II to the AFMP. Switzerland is therefore part of the EU-wide coordination of social security systems, including Unemployment Insurance. This Regulation sets out, in particular, which country is responsible for performing services if an unemployed person finds themself in a cross-border situation (for example if a cross-border commuter is unemployed).
 

What are the current regulations with regard to unemployed cross-border commuters?

Currently, if a cross-border commuter is unemployed, the country of residence is responsible for paying unemployment benefits and monitoring efforts to find work. The duration and amount of benefits primarily depend on the domestic law in the country of residence. In this context, the country of employment currently reimburses the country of residence up to a maximum of five months of paid benefits at that country’s rates. Generally, three months must be compensated. The exceptional case of five months of reimbursement applies if the unemployed cross-border commuter worked for more than 12 of the last 24 months in the country of last employment. Only the benefits actually paid out in accordance with the country’s national law are reimbursed. The social insurance contributions to the Unemployment Insurance go to the country of employment.

Differences in the duration or level of benefits may arise for cross-border commuters who draw their unemployment benefit in different countries of residence. However, such differences result only from domestic law and are not due to EU law or the CH-EU Agreement on the Free Movement of Persons.

Does this revision give unemployed cross-border commuters a choice in the competent labour market authority?

No, regarding registering with the employment office and claiming benefits, there is no choice.

Under this revision of Regulation No 883/2004, unemployed cross-border commuters would have to sign on with the labour market authority in the country of last employment when they become unemployed.

If unemployed cross-border commuters are entitled to UI benefits and apply for a benefit transfer, they must register with the authority in the country of destination.

What is the difference between Regulation 883/2004 and benefits transfer?

Benefits transfer allows an insured person to take their benefit entitlement with them to another member country for the purpose of a job search, without at the same time having to constantly be available to the Swiss Unemployment Insurance.

Specifically, this means that if a person is signed on as unemployed in Switzerland, they have the option of looking for work abroad and continuing to draw unemployment benefit. However, this is only possible for a maximum period of three months and only in an EU/EFTA country.

Which rules would apply to unemployed cross-border commuters if the revision is adopted by Switzerland?

If Switzerland adopts the EU’s revision, unemployed cross-border commuters whose last employment was in Switzerland would be bound by the regulations in Switzerland. Further information on the rights and obligations of unemployed people in Switzerland can be found under FAQs Unemployment Insurance or in the guidelines on UIA and unemployment benefits (PDF, 3 MB, 19.01.2026) .
 

How much have cross-border commuters paid in terms of contributions in recent years? 

The table below shows the amount of contributions paid in by cross-border commuters in recent years. These figures are estimates.
 

How much has Switzerland paid to neighbouring EU countries in the form of reimbursements in the last three years?

The table below summarises the gross reimbursements that Switzerland has paid to France, Germany, Austria, Italy and other countries since 2018.
 

Have cross-border commuters previously paid in more than was reimbursed? 

In previous years, a value of approx. CHF 600 million was paid in to the Swiss systems each year by cross-border commuters, and a sum of approx. CHF 300 million had to be paid by Switzerland to the relevant countries in the form of reimbursements. In other words, up until now, more has been paid in by cross-border commuters than was paid out as reimbursements.
 

Will the ongoing revision have an impact on Switzerland?

As Regulation 883/2004 is part of the applicable Agreement on the Free Movement of Persons (Annex II), the revision is relevant to Switzerland. 

Switzerland is not directly involved in revision matters at EU level, but is following the revision of Regulation 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems closely. 

Only if the revision is definitively adopted by the EU will Switzerland specifically assess the consequences. As many cross-border commuters are employed in Switzerland, the revision would involve additional costs. A concrete estimation of these additional costs cannot be carried out until this work is complete.
 

What additional costs would need to be anticipated if Switzerland were to adopt the revision?

According to current estimates by SECO, additional costs of between CHF 600 million and CHF 900 million should be assumed. These estimates involve a great deal of uncertainty as Switzerland has little empirical data on unemployed cross-border commuters.
 

How does the revision of Regulation 883/2004 relate to the Switzerland-EU package?

As mentioned above, Regulation 883/2004 is part of the applicable AFMP (Annex II) and the revision is therefore relevant to Switzerland. However, as the revision has not been formally adopted, it is not part of the Switzerland-EU package.

The Switzerland-EU package provides for the dynamic alignment of the AFMP with the relevant EU law in future. This still does not happen automatically, but only once the internal approval procedures are completed. 

If the revision of Regulation No 883/2004 is only adopted after the package enters into force, it would initially be handled by the AFMP Joint Committee (JC). Switzerland could then negotiate the adoption arrangements and request longer transition periods, for example. 

If no agreement is reached in the JC and Switzerland rejects the adoption, the EU may appeal to the arbitration tribunal. If the tribunal determines that there is an obligation to adopt the measure and this is not met, the EU may take proportionate compensatory measures. These are limited to the AFMP or other domestic market agreements and must be proportionate. Switzerland can have the proportionality assessed.

If the revised regulation is adopted, when would an arbitration tribunal become involved?

No arbitration tribunal is provided for under the current AFMP. Only when the Switzerland-EU package enters into force will the new institutional regulations apply, including on the dispute settlement procedure before the arbitration tribunal. If the EU and Switzerland are unable to agree on a solution in the AFMP Joint Committee (JC), the EU could go to the arbitration tribunal. 

If the arbitration tribunal subsequently concludes that Switzerland must adopt the legal act in the AFMP, but Switzerland still refuses to do so, the EU could take proportionate compensatory measures.

Where can I find more information on the Switzerland-EU package (Bilaterals III)?

Further basic information on the content of the Switzerland-EU package can be found on the FDFA website.
 

What is the status of the ongoing revision of Regulation 883/2004?

On 22 April 2026, the delegations of the European Council and the Parliament reached a provisional agreement on the revision of Regulation 883/2004 as part of the trilogue procedure. On 29 April 2026 , the Coreper (Committee of Permanent Representatives of the EU) approved the provisional agreement. The proposal has now been referred to the European Parliament.

What are the next steps?

The European Union’s institutional process will take some time before the proposal is formally adopted. The Council of the European Union and the European Parliament still have to agree on the proposal. After that, the revised regulation can enter into force.

Any amended regulation does not directly apply in Switzerland. The question of whether the legislation will be adopted by Switzerland will have to be reviewed in due course.

If the revision is formally adopted, it would be up to the European Union to put this on the agenda of the Swiss-EU Joint AFMP Committee. The adoption of the revision (or, more precisely, the updating of the Regulation 883/2004 listed in the Annex of the AFMP), could only take place following the completion of the usual domestic approval procedure, that is, with the express consent of Switzerland.

What room for manoeuvre does the Federal Council have in this policy area?

The Federal Council cannot give an opinion until the EU has formally approved the bill and asked Switzerland to integrate it in the AFMP at the Joint Committee. However, the European legislative procedure is not complete. The adoption of the revision of Regulation 883/2004 in the AFMP is carried out through a decision by the competent Joint Committee; Switzerland must therefore give its express agreement to the adoption. The Federal Council may refuse to adopt this revision of Regulation 883/2004. In that case retaliatory measures be expected from the EU though it is hard to predict their nature. Switzerland could not defend itself legally as the current agreement does not provide for a dispute settlement mechanism.

Within the Joint Committee, Switzerland would have the option – after consulting with the competent national authority (in this case parliament) – to ask questions about the Regulation, to carry out additional investigations into its feasibility, to examine the extent of an adoption and to negotiate the arrangements for a potential implementation, such as a transition period and other specific features. European Union member states, such as Luxembourg, have also obtained such transition periods.

If the Federal Council refuses, can the EU still implement this decision?

The EU has the authority to implement its legal acts within its own territory. It cannot force Switzerland to apply the revision of Regulation 883/2004 if the revision is not adopted in the AFMP. Between Switzerland and the European Union (EU), Regulation 883/2004 would continue to apply (in its current wording, before the revision). However, as mentioned above, the EU could take retaliatory measures against Switzerland in that case.