Swiss MPs Demand Probe Into Gifts Given to Trump After Tariff Deal

Post by : Saif Nasser

Two Swiss lawmakers have urged prosecutors to investigate whether gifts presented to U.S. President Donald Trump by top Swiss business leaders may have violated Switzerland’s strict anti-bribery laws. Their call for a legal review comes just days after Switzerland and the United States reached a major agreement to reduce a heavy tariff that had long affected Swiss goods.

The reported gifts, which included a Rolex watch and a gold bar, were allegedly given during a recent meeting at the White House. According to reports from Swiss newspaper Blick, the U.S. outlet Axios, and other media sources, the gifts were delivered by a group of influential Swiss business figures who visited Trump in the Oval Office earlier this month.

The timing of the meeting has raised serious questions. Only 10 days after the business delegation met the president, Switzerland and the U.S. agreed to cut a 39% tariff on Swiss products down to 15%. For many observers, this sequence of events seemed unusually close, prompting concerns about whether the gifts may have played an inappropriate role.

Raphael Mahaim and Greta Gysin, two Green Party members of the Swiss parliament, wrote to the public prosecutor demanding a full legal assessment. In their letter, they stressed that even political or economic goals cannot justify actions that may breach national laws. They said the public must know whether the reported gifts match the definition of an “undue advantage” under Swiss criminal law.

Under Swiss law, offering a foreign public official anything that could improperly influence a decision is a criminal offense. Such actions can result in up to five years in prison or significant fines. Switzerland’s legal system also allows any individual to report a suspected offense, which must then be evaluated by authorities.

The Swiss companies represented at the meeting included major global names: MSC, Rolex, Partners Group, Mercuria, Richemont, and MKS. A statement listing their participation was reviewed by Reuters. While Rolex declined to comment, other companies did not immediately respond to questions.

Alfred Gantner, a co-founder of Partners Group, said that collaboration between the government and private sector had helped solve the tariff dispute, but he did not address questions about gifts. The White House also offered no immediate comment.

At the center of the controversy is whether the items given to Trump were simply cultural gestures or whether they crossed the line into undue influence. Gifts to political leaders often follow diplomatic customs, but when luxury items and gold bars are involved, the distinction becomes more complex.

Swiss lawmakers fear that if no investigation is carried out, the integrity of Switzerland’s legal system could be questioned. They argue that even the possibility of wrongdoing must be studied carefully, as the country has a strong international reputation for enforcing anti-bribery and transparency laws.

For now, the public prosecutor’s office has not responded to requests for comment, leaving open the question of whether a formal probe will be launched. If prosecutors decide to investigate, it could become a major test of Switzerland’s legal commitment to preventing unethical influence in global politics.

As the issue develops, it will likely fuel larger debates about political gifts, international diplomacy, and the fine line between courtesy and corruption. The case also brings renewed attention to how business leaders interact with foreign officials, especially when major economic agreements are at stake.

The coming days will determine whether this episode becomes a brief political controversy or a full-scale legal matter with international implications.