3rd pilar - Limits to 15000 CHF

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 ?



1 Like

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 that‘d bear most of the loss in tax revenue will only vote next year, you say?

1 Like

That’s interesting indeed, although it hasn’t been adopted by either chamber yet, and the commission’s report actually recommends rejecting it, so we’ll 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):

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 haven’t contributed before the age of 25.
If from 25 on, you always contributed the maximum, you wont be able to buy back anything.

Yes, you’re absolutely right. That’s also what I meant by buying back “missing years of contributions”. In that sense, whether one measure or the other is more beneficial will depend on each individual’s 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 “Folge gegeben” as you point out (“donnĂ© suite” in French), whereas the other one is listed as “Annahme” (or “adoptĂ©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. I’m not an expert though, so beyond noticing that lexical difference, I must admit that I don’t know if there’s an actual difference here or not.

The difference is the one that’s already adopted (buying into 3a), was a “Motion” whereas the newer one is a “Parlamentarische Initiative”.
I could go into details, but what matters is that the newer 15K thingy goes to the second chamber after being accepted (“Folge gegeben/donnĂ© suite”) by the first one. :wink:


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 that’s the case, it only took them a year to go from one chamber to the other. :slight_smile:


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?

1 Like

If we can go by the national council, it’s gonna be in their spring session (27. Feb - 17. Mar). I wouldn’t bet on it though. :wink:

1 Like

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 don’t see how you would need two years to increase 3a limit from 7k to 15k. :slight_smile: Because IMHO there isn’t 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 it’d need to drive those two motions/initiaties forward.

Let’s 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.

1 Like

Council of states will vote on 20.494 on March 8th. Chronologisches Programm StĂ€nderat–Programme chronologique Conseil des Etats–Programma cronologico Consiglio degli Stati (parlament.ch)


Aaaand it was declined: Höhere Einzahlungen in SÀule 3a sind vom Tisch


“Schon heute zahlten nur etwa zehn Prozent der Bevölkerung jĂ€hrlich den Maximalbetrag von rund 6800 Franken ein.”

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 don’t 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 didn’t 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 I’m wrong ?