Hey @markus654 , nice find. Interesting chat/infos.
They definitely said that they are optimising by opening the second VB foundation for
Looking forward to it. Unfortunately he kind of said that they will try to get it out in 2026, so implies late 2026 or later IMO.
Do you think that moving from UBS to Swisscanto is possible? And would it be costly?
Nice find ! I didn’t get the relocation of the second fund. I am Looking forward to know more about it.
I will aim at withdrawing all the fund while retiring overseas . Let’s see
This “cheaper than Schwyz” is true for Baselland for amounts between ~300’000 and 700’000, but since we’re talking foundation domicile for people withdrawing once they have moved outside CH 
, Baselstadt is the relevant comparison (Viac domicile i.e. domicile of their Terzo Vorsorgestiftung).
And unfortunately Baselstadt is always more expensive than Schwyz.
I reckon the second domicile will be Schwyz (to compete with all the others based there), or maybe Graubünden (which is sexy above ~300k).
foundation domicile is not relevant if living in CH, since you are simply taxed by your home canton.
The cantonal parliament in SZ decided to slash the rates. The implementation is pending, as the socialist party went to court against that.
You mean for living there. In this case it makes no difference where the institution is domiciled.
But if your domicile is out of Switzerland by the time you cash out I think Schwyz is still the cheapest Kanton.
Here you have a comparison of all Kantons:
Yes, I was thinking for BL, but for BS, I thought was also cheaper somewhere between 500k and 1M.
But maybe I was looking at tables for average/gemeinde. Maybe the cheapest gemeinde in SZ is cheaper the BS (note the table you gave is not directly comparable for BS as there is no additional separate Gemeinde tax for BS). The SZ figure should be multiplied by between 1.84 and 3.21 depending on gemeinde to compare to the BS figure.
Per this once you get over a million, AI, NW, GR, UR and even SH become interesting.
… while the Federation wants to hike theirs - perfect teamwork 
… VIAC activated an online wizard for “Retroactive payment into 3a”:
IMO easy and smooth for this quite complicated topic…
15 posts were merged into an existing topic: Tax optimization: Retroactive purchases into pillar 3a
I also received the notification yesterday when I logged in. They’ve added the main indices that were missing from Finpension and that quite a few customers had been asking for over the past few years, especially the UBS World ex CH Quality. Personally, I was invested in Finpension, but I switched to the traditional plan.
Hedged version are interesting!
Yes, finally !
I am with both, FP and VIAC.
I’ve a decent performance with the Global 100 strategy by VIAC (+70.93% since mid-2020) but I think I will switch to the quality fund.
Update : VIAC allows max 35% in the quality fund. Very disappointing…
I’ve changed my strategy several times using VIAC since May 2020. In the end, the one that worked best and that I’m most satisfied with is this personal strategy (76.50% with 2 years where I put my 3a in Finpension [+37.71%]).
I have nearly identical allocation in 3a, not by choice (edit: by choice but not by design) but the only option I have have with my pledged 3a (key4 Vitainvest passive world 100)
No changes in VIAC’s bond offerings in a while. Do they have interesting products to diversify risks or low correlation to stocks? Emerging country debt or bonds where we can expect a positive return when stock markets crash?
That would be investment grade bonds, cash or gold/commodities. What’s wrong with VIAC’s bond funds offering?
I received a response from VIAC regarding the 35% limit. I’m sharing it here as it may be of interest to some people:
In our case, these limits form part of the investment framework approved by the foundation’s competent supervisory authority. They result from discussions and approvals between the foundation and its supervisory authority and do not derive from any specific provision of BVV 2 or BVV 3.
It should also be noted that the supervision of pension foundations in Switzerland is organised at cantonal or regional level. Practices and requirements may therefore vary depending on the supervisory authority concerned. For this reason, there is not necessarily a single legal provision in which this 35% limit is explicitly stated.
In other words, you can consult as many legal provisions as you wish, but you will not find this limit stated explicitly in the legislation. It forms part of the investment framework authorised and approved for the foundation.
The investment possibilities offered by the product are defined within this framework, and we operate within the limits authorised to us. Unfortunately, we are not able to go beyond these limits.
Personally, I find this lack of transparency disappointing. When it comes to flexibility and precise portfolio weightings, finpension is clearly ahead in my view.
I also find it unfortunate that VIAC imposes limitations that are not clearly documented or easily traceable to the applicable legal provisions, regardless of whether they stem from its own strategy or its supervisory framework.
Maybe ask VIAC to ask the CHF hedged version of these factor funds. Then you can reach 70% by 35% each in hedged / unhedged version.
Not all the way but still quite a lot more than current limit.
That’s a good point ! I checked again and some hedge versions have 98% or 99% limitation.
