Hello
Have you seen this new law proposal where the limit of 3rd pilar could be 15000?
Would you know what will be the next steps to get this law approved ?
https://www.parlament.ch/fr/services/news/Pages/2022/20220316185412101194158159038_bsf181.aspx
thanks
The national council agreed to this:
20.494 | Renforcer la prévoyance vieillesse individuelle | Business | The Swiss Parliament (parlament.ch)
So next year the council of states will vote yes or no, on whether to change the limit for pillar 3 contributions.
So the ones thatâd bear most of the loss in tax revenue will only vote next year, you say?
Thatâs interesting indeed, although it hasnât been adopted by either chamber yet, and the commissionâs report actually recommends rejecting it, so weâll see next year.
Much more certain and forthcoming is the one that was actually adopted by both chambers and is just waiting to be implemented into law (and mentioned by the commission as a reason to reject the other proposal):
https://www.parlament.ch/en/ratsbetrieb/suche-curia-vista/geschaeft?AffairId=20193702
This one should allow buy-backs for missing years of contributions in the 3rd pillar, up to a maximum of around 35K every five years.
Yes, the national council did accept it (Folge gegeben).
But only if you havenât contributed before the age of 25.
If from 25 on, you always contributed the maximum, you wont be able to buy back anything.
Yes, youâre absolutely right. Thatâs also what I meant by buying back âmissing years of contributionsâ. In that sense, whether one measure or the other is more beneficial will depend on each individualâs personal situation (e.g. age, length of career in Switzerland, etc.). In any case, if the annual limit were to be increased to 15K for instance, I assume that the other provision (buy-backs) would need to be adjusted accordingly anyway.
That might be my own misunderstanding. This most recent one is listed as âFolge gegebenâ as you point out (âdonnĂ© suiteâ in French), whereas the other one is listed as âAnnahmeâ (or âadoptĂ©â). I assumed that the first one implied only some kind of approval for the relevant commission to investigate further until a final vote for adoption is taken. Iâm not an expert though, so beyond noticing that lexical difference, I must admit that I donât know if thereâs an actual difference here or not.
The difference is the one thatâs already adopted (buying into 3a), was a âMotionâ whereas the newer one is a âParlamentarische Initiativeâ.
I could go into details, but what matters is that the newer 15K thingy goes to the second chamber after being accepted (âFolge gegeben/donnĂ© suiteâ) by the first one. 
Short update on this topic:
This parlamentary initiative is a point of the agenda in the social security and health committee meeting end of January:
sitzungsplanung-sgk-s (parlament.ch) (20.494, 3rd line)
I imagine, that it will therefore finally be treated by the StÀnderat in their spring session (27. Feb - 17. Mar).
If thatâs the case, it only took them a year to go from one chamber to the other. 
Update2 on this topic:
The social security and health comission of the StÀnderat (council of states) discussed this in January and they voted against increasing the 3a limits to 15k.
This means, that the entire StÀnderat will have to vote on this initiative.
When will this happen?
If we can go by the national council, itâs gonna be in their spring session (27. Feb - 17. Mar). I wouldnât bet on it though.
Spring session agenda will be available at the end of this week. If accepted, the commission (of the national council) will have two years to elaborate a project.
Yes and then both councils vote again on that.
Although I donât see how you would need two years to increase 3a limit from 7k to 15k. Because IMHO there isnât much wriggle room how the decree should look.
So I just wrote a mail to one of the national assembly members co-signing the initiative (that, curiously, I have a number of linkedin acquaintances with), asking him what itâd need to drive those two motions/initiaties forward.
Letâs see how that goes.
EDIT: Replied within ten minutes, ha! 19.3702 / purchase into 3a is, supposedly, waiting on action of the Federal Council / Federal Department of Home Affairs. The FDP parliamentary group already decided to follow up and ask about this at the next parliamentary question time.
Council of states will vote on 20.494 on March 8th. Chronologisches Programm StĂ€nderatâProgramme chronologique Conseil des EtatsâProgramma cronologico Consiglio degli Stati (parlament.ch)
âSchon heute zahlten nur etwa zehn Prozent der Bevölkerung jĂ€hrlich den Maximalbetrag von rund 6800 Franken ein.â
Typical politician argument. A number is thrown out without any context or critical thinking. How many people are aware of 3a and the possible tax savings? How many are aware but donât want to use their expensive house bank solutions? How many are aware of low-cost solutions like VIAC and finpension?
Still, I think the possibility to compensate years for which you didnât contribute in the past is more important than increasing the maximal amount, because of the salary volatility people may have.
What do you think, how high would this percentage be, if everybody was aware of the possible tax savings?
I agree. There was another proposal to be voted for this topic or Iâm wrong ?