The Package Approach

Summary: The package approach is the fundamental architectural principle of the Bilateral Agreements III. Instead of a separate framework agreement (as with the failed InstA), the institutional mechanisms are integrated directly into each sectoral agreement -- a so-called "vertical" approach. The 18 agreements form an indivisible whole.

---

¶ Political decisions: as of 6 September 2026

New political decisions checked on 6 September 2026; earlier background retains its stated reference date.

22.05.2026 — In its co-report, the Council of States foreign affairs committee rejected a mandatory referendum on the Switzerland–EU package by 8 votes to 5. This committee position does not settle the final parliamentary decision. Original source.

04.09.2026 — The committee approved the stabilisation component by 9–3 with one abstention. It is ready for the Council of States’ autumn session; the electricity agreement is provisionally expected in winter. The committee supports the proposed immigration levy. This is not final parliamentary approval. Original source.

¶ From the InstA to the Package Approach

¶ The Failed Model: Horizontal Umbrella

The Institutional Framework Agreement (InstA), which the Bundesrat terminated on 26 May 2021, pursued a horizontal approach: an overarching agreement was to serve as an "umbrella" over the existing market access agreements, establishing institutional rules -- dynamic adoption of law, dispute resolution and oversight [1][2].

This model failed on three core problems:

• Wage protection: Irreconcilable positions on the flanking measures
• Citizens' Rights Directive: Feared expansion of social benefits for EU citizens
• State aid: Possible restriction of cantonal subsidy policy

¶ The New Model: Vertical Integration

The Bilateral Agreements III take a fundamentally different approach. The institutional elements are not consolidated in a separate framework agreement but are directly embedded in each individual sectoral agreement [1][5].

Concretely, this means: each of the 18 agreements contains its own provisions on:

• Dynamic adoption of law (which EU legal acts are relevant)
• Dispute resolution (jurisdiction of the arbitration tribunal)
• Oversight (competences of the supervisory authority)

¶ Why the Change?

The vertical approach offered several advantages for the negotiations [5][17]:

1. Political acceptance: No "foreign umbrella" over the Swiss legal order -- a major criticism of the InstA
2. Sectoral differentiation: Each agreement can have tailor-made institutional rules
3. Flexibility: Different areas can have different exceptions and transition periods
4. Sovereignty optics: Switzerland does not join a superordinate framework but agrees bilateral rules per sector

¶ Structure of the Package

¶ The 18 Agreements

Note: The exact count of 18 agreements varies slightly depending on the source, as some elements (e.g. programme participation) can be counted as one or more agreements [1][3].

¶ The Principle of Indivisibility

The 18 agreements form an indivisible whole (package approach). This means [1]:

• They were negotiated as a complete package
• They were signed simultaneously (2 March 2026)
  The committee approved the stabilisation component by 9–3 with one abstention. It is ready for the Council of States’ autumn session; the electricity agreement is provisionally expected in winter. The committee supports the proposed immigration levy. This is not final parliamentary approval. Original source.
• A single agreement cannot be separately put into force or terminated

¶ Comparison with Earlier Linkage Mechanisms

¶ Criticism of the Package Approach

¶ Supporters' Perspective

The package approach is valued by supporters as a balanced compromise: Switzerland receives tailor-made rules in each agreement rather than a "one size fits all" framework, while the EU has the assurance that all parts of the package will be implemented [15].

¶ Critics' Perspective

Critics argue that the package approach restricts freedom of action more than the guillotine clause: while the Bilateral Agreements I could theoretically be terminated as a whole, the indivisible package of the Bilateral Agreements III does not allow any "cherry-picking" -- i.e. no selective acceptance of individual agreements [16].

The question of whether the package approach truly represents an improvement over a horizontal framework agreement is assessed differently. International law scholar Michael Ambuehl and Daniela Scherer (ETH Zurich) had already analysed various institutional models in 2022 and identified the vertical approach as a possible solution [17].

---

¶ Sources

[1] FDFA (2026). Switzerland-EU Package (Bilateral III). Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. [Open Access]

[2] Bundesrat (2021). Press release: Termination of InstA negotiations. 26 May 2021. [Open Access]

[3] GTAI (2026). Agreements of the Switzerland-EU package signed. Germany Trade & Invest. [Open Access]

[5] FDFA (2026). Fact sheet: Institutional elements. Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. [Open Access]

[15] economiesuisse (2026). Bilateral III -- The best option. Dossier Politik. [Open Access] Note: Business federation.

[16] UNSER RECHT (2026). Bilateral III -- what is it about? Information platform. [Open Access]

[17] EIZ Publishing (2022). Ambuehl/Scherer: Standpunkte Bilaterale III. Europa Institut Zurich. [Open Access]

---

Political update: 6 September 2026; background reference: March 2026