General Information

The Price Disclosure Ordinance (PDO) is part of fair trading law and aims to ensure price clarity and transparency. It requires that every advertisement includes the actual final price to be paid (known as the "detailed price") in Swiss francs – including VAT as well as all charges and non-voluntary surcharges. It must also be clearly identifiable which product or service the price refers to: goods and services must be described according to essential criteria such as brand, type, variety, quality, or quantity. This is the only way to ensure that consumers understand which offer the price information and comparisons relate to. In principle, the advertised price must match the product shown or described. Specific rules also apply to price comparisons, which are explained in this article.

The PDO applies to any person (whether natural or legal) who communicates prices to consumers in a public manner. As a result, virtually all industries are affected.

A violation of the PDO is punishable under the provisions of the Federal Act against Unfair Competition and may result in a fine of up to CHF 20,000 if committed intentionally. Fines may also be imposed for negligent violations. These penalties are generally directed at the responsible natural persons (executives) within the company.

Price Comparisons

High discounts lead to high sales – the greater the perceived price difference to the competition, the stronger the purchase incentive. This creates a clear motivation for retailers to advertise with especially large discounts – even if they don't always reflect reality. The danger: consumers may be deliberately misled by seemingly great deals. To counter this, the PDO includes provisions for price comparisons.

The PDO allows three types of price comparisons: self-comparison (own promotional price vs. own previous price), introductory price (current price vs. future price), and competitor comparison (own price vs. competitor’s price). In all cases, only prices that have actually been applied may be compared. Non-binding list prices or dealer prices that were never actually charged (e.g., "fictitious prices") may not be used as a basis for comparison. In the case of introductory or competitor price comparisons, the type of comparison must also be explicitly stated (e.g., using terms like “introductory price” or “our price vs. competitor’s price”).

The comparison prices must merely be credibly demonstrated – strict proof is not required. However, retailers should, to the best of their knowledge and belief, refer to concrete comparison prices and document them when publishing an offer.

Self-Comparison (Own Reference Price)

In a self-comparison, a retailer advertises that a product is “now cheaper” than before, citing their own former, higher price as the reference. This is only permissible under strict conditions: the product must have actually been offered at the higher price immediately prior to the promotion.

Until the end of 2024, the so-called “halving rule” applied. According to this rule, the previous regular price could only be used as a comparison for half as long as it was actually charged, and no longer than two months. Example: If a device was sold for CHF 200 for 16 weeks and then for CHF 100 for 8 weeks (50% discount), this was allowed (since 8 weeks = 16 weeks / 2). After that, using the CHF 200 price as a reference was no longer permissible.

As of January 1, 2025, a new “30-day rule” applies. It offers an alternative to the halving rule: if the higher comparison price was continuously charged for at least 30 days prior to the promotion, it may be used as a reference price for all subsequent reductions without time limitation. In other words: if an item was offered at the normal price for one month, that original price can be used as a reference indefinitely. In cases of repeated, successive price reductions, the same original price can continue to be referenced, as long as the final price keeps decreasing with each promotion. However, if the price is increased again, the original comparison price may no longer be referenced.This gives companies a choice since 2025: they can continue using the old halving rule, but must still apply the time limitation (half the time, max. two months), or they can use the new rule and dispense with time restrictions. Another simplification under the new regime concerns temporarily discontinued products: if a product is removed from sale after a promotion and later reintroduced, the previously used comparison price may still be referenced.

Competitor Comparison

In a competitor comparison, the seller’s price is compared to that of other providers. The comparison price must be an actual market price, charged by most providers for the same product within the relevant market area. Only if the product is truly being sold at the stated price in the market is the comparison permitted. Unlike in self-comparisons, there is no time limit here.

As with self-comparisons, the difference must be clearly stated. For example, the advertisement should explicitly read “our price – competitor’s price.” This is the only way the customer knows a market price comparison is being made. Recommended retail prices (RRPs) may only be used in competitor comparisons if they are actually applied in the market. Excessive “fictitious prices” may not be used as comparison prices.

Discounts Across Multiple Products or Categories

In practice, mistakes are frequently made when PDO requirements are not followed. Especially problematic are vague discount claims without mentioning a specific product or price. Advertisers who merely promise “up to 50% off” without stating former and current prices or describing concrete products are in breach of the PDO. Instead, every percentage claim must be backed by the old and new price – for example, “was CHF 100, now CHF 80” for a 20% discount.

If a discount is promoted for a product category – e.g., “up to 50% off all chairs” – then examples must be given: one product with the maximum discount and one with the minimum discount. These examples are mandatory so that consumers can understand the true pricing.

On the other hand, general discounts on entire product categories are allowed, provided the same discount applies to all items – e.g., “50% off all chairs.” In such cases, there is no need to list individual prices, but it must be clearly stated which ranges or product groups the discounts apply to.

Practical Tips

Every advertising campaign should be reviewed internally for PDO compliance. It is essential that the detailed price is always stated and that every type of comparison (self or competitor) is correctly labeled. Comparison prices should be documented so their accuracy can be credibly demonstrated. This can include printing or saving competitors’ websites with timestamps.If an impermissible price comparison is found, authorities may intervene: the cantons are responsible for enforcing PDO compliance. Enforcement intensity varies significantly between cantons. If a suspicion arises, retailers are typically asked to submit a statement. For such responses, having clear documentation is highly beneficial. The new rules since 2025 simplify how retailers can communicate comparisons in the context of promotions. When communicating comparison prices, it is essential that marketing teams and all responsible staff are made aware of the rules. ADVORO has experience advising on price comparison communication across various industries (e.g., retail, e-commerce, financial sector, or service industries). We can support you in designing your pricing and advertising strategy, implementing it, and training your staff.