I was talking about TER. But you are right of course, 0.5% or even 1%/year on fees is just 68CH/year. This won’t matter that much over 20+ years.
Regarding adjusting within VIAC: I have to because my 3rd pillar is currently making up for 75% of my investable assets. It’s constantly decreasing in it’s overall part of my whole portfolio.
Ok, i wasn’t thinking of quite such an example. That’s difficult.
You could maybe try to re-balance using the buy-in amount, so at a point in time when you see you need to increase say EM, you deposit fresh money at VIAC and increase the EM ETF allocation. That way the new money will buy mainly EM and there won’t be something else sold. If your 3a is not much more than 20k then the yearly 7k is a high amount to swing allocations easily.
I am considering to hold only CHF assets in viac and reduce my CHF/swiss ETFs at IB.
Guys, when I set up my account I randomly choose 40% strategy, I changed it today to global 100 as I wanted to wire the whole 6826CHF. However, the change will be effective on January. What’s going to happen now ? I don’t want my money to be invested in obligation. When you transfer the money is it directly automatically invested or there is an extra step where it just sits there in cash ? I’d like to invest when my strategy is global 100 only. As a side note, choosing a simple 3a is only possible on rebalancing day as well.
It stays in cash until the beginning of the next month.
I was also considering only CHF assets in VIAC (I want higher than market-capped domestic allocation (diversification with respect to currency risk, …); also FX fees, …).
Is there a regulatory reason behind the Switzerland 100 not actually being 100% Switzerland? Or behind not allowing higher than 20%/35% on the Credit Suisse SMI/SPI extra ETF?
Tripped over an interesting article here in German:
https://www.graffenried.ch/de/ueber-uns/publikationen/?oid=10225&lang=de&news_eintragId=20041
It stated that, because with recent solutions like VIAC, where you are invested fully in equities, you will get taxed differently at the end. Maybe I did not understood this correctly, but what is your opinion on this.
What I think they mean is that normally you would not get taxed on capital gains outside of 3a and here they eventually get taxed when you take it out. If I remember well someone already mentioned that somewhere on this forum.
This is indeed interesting, but i am not yet convinced.
The article simplifies heavily at many points, for example
however the basic statement becomes clear: the one time taxation at cash-out could exceed the sum of the yearly tax savings. But isolated as such, this fact is not conclusive, and ignoring all the other factors above, it may be no more than a part in a bigger calculation to find out if 3a is worth it.
I made a quick & dirty calculation for zurich, single, no kids, chf 100000, source taxed
where the yearly savings of 1164 sum up to 45kCHF, whereas the cash-out-tax is 109kCHF.
Also excluding the fact that you are investing the tax savings. 1164/y invested with 8.8% (what a number, lol) would result in additional 390k.
If I run the numbers for me: I save 25%, so that’s 1700/year. Let’s assume 6%/year for 30 years in Viac and 6.5% in VT (due to lower fees).
Taxes: I’ll save 51k in taxes and and pay ~33k on 550k. So net gain of 18k.
Fees: I lose 52k in gains due to higher fees.
Additional investments: 1700/y invested for 30 years with 6.5% result in 152k.
So I already look at +118k without taking into account that dividends aren’t taxed in 3rd pillar and I wont pay wealth tax as long as it is in the 3rd pillar.
Additional sources:
IMO it’s nearly impossible to model this in a sensible way over a 30+ year time horizon. But still, the issue with capital gains being taxed as part of a 3a-sheltered account invested in shares is true.
Keep in mind that the top 3 stocks (by market capitalization) make up 55% of SMI. You‘d create a cluster risk by concentrating (instead of diversifying) in these 3 stocks, for just a small (if meaningful at all) diversification in currency.
And for each of Nestlé, Roche and Novartis, domestic revenue will be just a tiny fraction of their entire revenue. It‘s like gaining a small „diversification“ currencies, while at the same time concentrating in a few companies.
I‘m not sure if I read it on the forum before - but the thought occurred to me as well, earlier this month.
Gives me second thoughts about contributing to pillar 3a.
Supposedly article is based on a Masters (“Masterarbeit von Scheidegger (2018)”) but the example quoted is worthy of a 12 year old’s maths project. 
@yakari, I didn’t say he is wrong, but with the simplifications made in the example, the calculation becomes 12 year old math level and therefore … quite worthless.
“…vernachlässigen den Effekt von Gebühren oder Dividenden … Weiter könnte man auch die jährliche Steuerersparnis in Aktien reinvestieren oder die 3a-Gelder gestaffelt beziehen…”
In an article, based on a Masters, posted on a fancy Private Bank home page, I expect more.
“Als spezialisierter Vermögensverwalter stehen wir Ihnen für die Bewirtschaftung Ihres freien Wertschriftenvermögens gerne zur Seite.”
Thanks, but no thanks.
That was probably this thread?
For safe (=low) income from capital i will not pay viac-grade fees or chose 3a-style illiquid containers.
Rebalancing wouldn’t be easy if you use Viac only for cash/bonds/REITs.
Who has bonds anyway? At least with CHF as reference currency.
If I had a cash/ bond allocation in my portfolio, it would be some bond ETF and some cash on the money market. what use is a cash position in a portfolio if you cannot use it for rebalancing, because you cannot buy IB ETFs with it?
my liquididty cushion is on my giro account.
At 0.3% interest rate and >0.35% inflation (CHF) I call these a safe loss, not a safe income.
So in simple words…:
VIAC is still the best way to invest for example with “Global 100” or others strategies.
Especially when able to invest the yearly tax reduction separately into the market.
And also splitting the 3a accounts investments, so that the late tax impacts will be distributed during several years.
In comparison to invest normally into VT or similar construct with a low TER.
Is my summary correct so far?