BEST PRACTICEBest
BEST PRACTICEBest Practice: Digital Nomad from ThirdCountry – “Maya Kapoor”BRIZIDA ALANI, CONVINUSFactsMaya Kapoor, age 34, is an Indian citizen and self-employed software developer. She runs a soleproprietorship based in Bangalore, developing web apps for international clients including twoGerman start-ups and one US-based company. As a child-free, location-independent professional,she has lived as a digital nomad for two years, working in Thailand, Georgia, Dubai, and Portugal.In 2025, Maya decides to work in Switzerland for several months. She enters in March 2025 on aSchengen tourist visa (valid for 90 days within 180 days), rents a furnished unit in a co-living space inZurich, and plans to work remotely for about 70 days before traveling to France. She believes herstay is legal, as she does not intend to be employed by a Swiss firm nor serve clients in Switzerland.She maintains her residence, health, and social insurance in India and consciously avoidsregistering with local or migration authorities, assuming she’s only "privately" staying and workingin Switzerland.In May 2025, during a routine check in several co-living spaces, the cantonal migration officeinterviews Maya. She openly states she is self-employed and working remotely for foreign clients.As a result, she receives a ruling that she violated the Federal Act on Foreign Nationals andIntegration (AIG). She is accused of conducting a permit-required activity without the properauthorization. She is also informed of a potential tax liability in Switzerland, and the AHVcompensation office is notified.Legal Questions1.Was Maya’s stay in Switzerland legal under foreign national law?2.Did Maya engage in an activity requiring a permit under the AIG, even though she worked forforeign clients?3.Is Maya liable for taxes in Switzerland despite having no Swiss clients and only a temporarystay?4.Is Maya subject to Swiss AHV/IV/EO contributions?6convinus.com
BEST PRACTICELegal Opinion1. Foreign National LawUnder Art. 5 AIG, third-country nationals may only stay in Switzerland without a residence permit ifwithin the visa-free period (typically 90 days per half-year).But duration alone is not decisive—if employment is performed, a permit may be required underArt. 11 ff. AIG.A Schengen visa for tourism does not allow employment, including self-employment, even if it’ssolely online for foreign clients. Swiss practice (BAG, SEM) considers self-employment with profitmotive as economic activity, regardless of where clients are located.Conclusion: Maya’s stay was not legal. She engaged in a permit-requiring activity without a permit,violating Art. 115(1)(b) AIG. This can lead to expulsion or an entry ban.2. Employment and Permit RequirementArt. 11(1) AIG states that all gainful employment (dependent or independent) requires a permit.Maya’s work qualifies as self-employment, carried out at her own risk with customer acquisitionand financial independence.Because her work is physically carried out in Switzerland, she is subject to AIG and should haveapplied for a permit before starting (usually an L permit for self-employment under Art. 19 VZAE).Conclusion: Maya carried out a permit-requiring activity without permission—therefore her activitywas unlawful.3. Tax LiabilityUnder Art. 3(1) DBG, individuals are liable to tax in Switzerland if they reside or stay there. SinceMaya stays under 183 days and has no permanent establishment in Switzerland, she remains fullytax-resident in India (Art. 14 DTA India).7convinus.com
Expat policy 
LinkedIn
Youtube
Instagram
Email