Privatkonkurs in Switzerland: Why There Is No Discharge of Debt

Privatkonkurs is what a reader searches when unpaid debt has become unmanageable and they are hoping Swiss law offers a formal way out. In Germany and Austria, a comparable search leads to a process that can end, after a period of years, with the remaining balance written off. In Switzerland it does not.

This page sets out the three procedures an individual debtor actually has, what each one achieves and does not achieve, and the precise mechanism, the Verlustschein, that keeps an unpaid debt alive for two decades rather than discharging it. It is part of our wider Betreibung and debt enforcement coverage, itself part of the broader guide to Swiss law.

Information last verified on 20 July 2026. This page provides general legal information about Swiss law and does not constitute legal advice in an individual case.

The headline fact: there is no broad discharge of residual debt

Say it plainly, because planning around the wrong assumption here has real consequences. Swiss law has no general procedure that lets an individual debtor emerge from insolvency with unpaid debt simply cancelled. Germany and Austria both offer a route that can end, after a period of years, with an individual's remaining debt written off. Switzerland offers no equivalent.

This is not stated anywhere as a single sentence in the SchKG, the Swiss debt enforcement code. It is what three provisions produce when read together, Art. 149 SchKG, Art. 149a SchKG and Art. 271 SchKG, all covered in detail below. The absence of a discharge is the settled practical position under Swiss law, not a rule copied from a clause that denies it, because no such clause exists to quote.

Your three real options as an individual debtor

An ordinary private individual, meaning anyone not entered on the commercial register in a qualifying business capacity, has three procedures available once debt becomes unmanageable. Each is genuinely different in who starts it, how long it takes, and what it can achieve.

Konkurs auf eigenes Begehren (Art. 191 SchKG)

Under Art. 191 SchKG, a debtor can request their own bankruptcy directly, by declaring to the court that they are insolvent. The court opens Konkurs unless there is a realistic prospect of a Schuldenbereinigung under Art. 333 ff. SchKG instead.

Opening a Konkurs liquidates whatever the debtor owns and distributes the proceeds among creditors according to statutory rank. It does not, on its own, cancel whatever remains unpaid once that distribution is complete, the same absence of discharge described throughout this page.

Nachlassvertrag and Nachlassstundung (Art. 293 ff. SchKG)

A Nachlassvertrag is a court supervised composition process, and either the debtor or an eligible creditor can request it under Art. 293 SchKG. The debtor's own request needs a current balance sheet, an income statement, a liquidity plan and a provisional restructuring proposal.

The court grants an immediate provisional stay of up to four months, extendable by up to another four months under Art. 293a SchKG. If there is clearly no prospect of a workable restructuring, the court can open Konkurs on its own motion instead.

This procedure is typically used by businesses, but it is procedurally available to an individual debtor in specific conditions too. It is a heavier process than the private Schuldenbereinigung below, and most individuals with straightforward consumer debt use the lighter track instead.

Einvernehmliche private Schuldenbereinigung (Art. 333 ff. SchKG)

This is the track actually built for an ordinary consumer, and it is available only to a debtor who is not subject to Konkursbetreibung under Art. 42 SchKG, meaning almost every private individual qualifies. The Nachlassgericht grants a stay of at most three months, extendable to a maximum of six months, and appoints a Sachwalter to run the case.

During the stay, the debtor can be pursued only for periodic family law maintenance payments, and several statutory clocks pause under Art. 334 Abs. 3 SchKG, including the one year limit on requesting continuation of a Betreibung and the one year cap on an income seizure. The Sachwalter uses this window to negotiate directly with creditors toward an amicable settlement.

What this procedure achieves depends entirely on whether creditors agree to the negotiated terms. Unlike a discharge imposed by law after a set number of years, an outcome here still rests on actual agreement, which is exactly what einvernehmlich, meaning agreed or amicable, signals in the procedure's own name.

Worked example: what an unresolved Pfändung actually leaves behind

Suppose a Pfändung against a private individual recovers only part of what is owed, say CHF 3,000 toward a CHF 8,000 claim. The unpaid CHF 5,000 does not simply disappear from the case.

Under Art. 149 SchKG, every creditor who took part in the Pfändung receives a Verlustschein for that unpaid CHF 5,000. Under Art. 149 Abs. 3 SchKG, the same creditor can continue collecting on it for six months after the Verlustschein is issued, without needing a new Zahlungsbefehl at all.

After that six month window, if the creditor wants to enforce further, a fresh Betreibungsbegehren is needed. But the Verlustschein itself already counts as a signed debt acknowledgment under Art. 149 Abs. 2 SchKG, which means the creditor only needs provisional Rechtsöffnung under Art. 82 SchKG to proceed again, not a full lawsuit.

Holding the Verlustschein is also, by itself, a ground to freeze any asset the debtor is later found to own in Switzerland, under Art. 271 Ziff. 5 SchKG. No new Betreibung and no fresh court finding is required first, only the existing Verlustschein.

The claim survives for a long time on this basis. Under Art. 149a SchKG it becomes time barred 20 years after the Verlustschein was issued, or at most one year after the debtor's death, when it is pursued against the estate instead.

Deleted only on payment, never with time alone

The register entry tied to a Verlustschein is not cleared by the passage of time, and it is not cleared by the underlying Pfändung case simply closing. Under Art. 149a Abs. 3 SchKG, the entry is deleted only once the debt behind it has actually been paid in full.

This is the concrete shape of Switzerland having no broad discharge. A debtor can wait out the 20 years, and the claim itself becomes unenforceable at that point, but nothing removes it earlier simply because time has passed or because a case has ended.

Why this is a structural conclusion, not a single quoted rule

No provision in the SchKG says, in so many words, that Swiss law provides no discharge of residual debt. That sentence does not exist to quote, because the rule is not stated that way.

It follows instead from reading Art. 149, Art. 149a and Art. 271 SchKG together: a Verlustschein survives the enforcement case that created it, counts as its own signed debt acknowledgment, supports a fresh asset freeze on sight, and is only time barred after 20 years. Nothing in that chain extinguishes the claim earlier, and nothing elsewhere in the SchKG does either. That combination, not a single denial, is the settled practical position for an unpaid balance left after Pfändung, Konkurs or an unsuccessful Nachlassvertrag alike.

Who this cannot help, and where to go instead

None of the three procedures above functions like a discharge that arrives automatically after a fixed number of years. A debtor who needs that kind of automatic fresh start, the way German or Austrian law can eventually provide it, will not find it in Swiss law regardless of which procedure they use.

What each procedure can offer is more modest and more procedural: liquidating what exists through Konkurs, a structured restructuring window through Nachlassvertrag, or a negotiated settlement under a temporary stay through private Schuldenbereinigung. Deciding which of these actually fits a specific financial situation, and negotiating with creditors inside it, is exactly the kind of individualized judgment call this page cannot make for a reader.

A practical next step for anyone in this position is the Schuldenberatungsstelle serving their canton or commune, the public debt counselling office set up for this purpose across Switzerland. These offices assess an individual's actual finances and can advise on which of the procedures above, if any, fits, without the cost of a first appointment with a lawyer.

Why a German or Austrian answer is the wrong answer here

German language search results for privatkonkurs are dominated by German and Austrian content, and both of those systems answer a different question. Germany's insolvency process and Austria's equivalent can both end in the remaining debt being written off after a period of years, once the debtor completes the required steps.

Nothing comparable exists in Switzerland. The three procedures on this page structure how a debtor deals with existing creditors and, in the case of Konkurs, how remaining assets are liquidated. None of them functions as a route to having the unpaid balance simply cancelled after a waiting period.