Without looking at the article my first thought was “they bought property before it became crazy”, and going into the article confirms it.
But broadly yeah, the thought that middle class 60something in CH should probably be millionaires was one I had within weeks of moving here.
Edit: if anything this table tells me what I intuitively thought already, that most people do fuck all with their money other than buy a house:
Median pension assets are more than 700K CHF, I think boomers would like that the new law (with higher federal rate) is delayed until they cash out 
Most people don’t buy real estate in Switzerland. But their pension funds do. So I think in a way most of us have real estate in our exposure
Yeah I am aware, but was referring to the example in the article.
I added a table for absolute impact as well… very few people will be actually benefitted. I do not know if this impacts actual voting or not.
… or into the 2nd pillar if there is a chance/ risk of capital withdrawal later.
Is it just me or is the political message devastating. People were forced/ lured into contributing to a nest egg beyond AHV, with nice conversion rates for the 2nd pillar, low withdrawal taxes for capital, and tax deductions at the point of contributing. Now the resulting pot of funds seems too juicy for politics to ignore, so those same people are suddenly called „rich“ to justify doubling, tripling, or quadrupling taxation when those „trapped“ funds are withdrawn?
/rant mode
A little early in the game, difficult to see such break of good faith is going to make it into law without attracting a referendum, and the wrath of the 3rd pillar industry though.
Odd also the idea to set taxation on capital that may have built over many decades so heavily based on income of a single year. If the calculator linked earlier is correct, a 1m withdrawal currently attracts 23k of federal taxes, tomorrow it will attract between 8k and 93k based on a single year of income!
Likely avoidance strategies and incentive settings -
Obviously, I’m against this increase in tax . I think the risk of a referendum is pretty high.
In any case, i don’t understand the logic to use the income of a specific year to calculate a tax on something you have accumulated during decades.
Also using 5% is a bit of a joke, if a retire invests like a pension fund, the yearly return will be lower than that.
Don‘t worry, the current draft will never be implemented. Reason beeing is that it discriminates retirees born in a later monh of the year. If implemented, everyone that wanted to withdraw cash (at keastvin part)!would need to retire in January. The scary thing is not the current draft but the lack of professionalismn by the current federal administration. Looks like no-one spotted this flaw yet.
Lets wait for the final law and then decide. But highly likely, I seill stop contributing to 3a. Not because of the new law but because of a loss of trust in our government and their proficiency.
That way of thinking might make sense for 1st pillar, but certainly not for 2nd and 3rd.
I find the direction of the federal council increasingly concerning. The increase in value-added tax (VAT), the reduction of the exemption threshold from CHF 300 to 150, and now the increase in taxes for 3a and pension funds.
Switzerland slowly becoming more socialist and the own responsibilities for personal finances and saving becoming obsolet
It’s hyperbole, I am not saying they are about to forget hundreds of thousands gathered in the 2nd pillar, just saying it’s far enough for a person gearing for real FIRE (not at 55 but at 40) not to rely on it.
It is still tax preferred, both investments and the withdraw.
But I understand that you are not happy - neither am I.
I have yet to find the actual calculation formula.
Does anyone have a link, or source? so far, i only found secondary literature providing qualitative indications.
in order to make up my mind, i need hard numbers^^
I consider delaying my monthly 3a contributions until i found out more
From the report:
Le groupe d’experts a étudié plusieurs solutions et propose de fixer le taux d’imposition des retraits en capital au niveau fédéral de sorte à obtenir (autant que possible) la même charge fiscale que sur la perception de rentes. Les retraits en capital seraient alors convertis en une rente annuelle correspondante et ajoutés au reste du revenu, ce qui permettrait d’obtenir le taux d’imposition des retraits en capital correspondant au revenu. Le groupe d’experts a cherché, avec l’AFC, des solutions permettant d’empêcher de faire baisser le taux d’imposition en réduisant le revenu l’année d’un retrait. Afin d’éviter ce type de planification fiscale, il conviendrait de ne pas tenir compte des éléments apériodiques dans le calcul du revenu pour fixer le taux.
Pillar 2/3 is 40% of my retirement fund!
Some sort of calculator is also shared at post Here. Not sure if it’s from newspaper or government
I‘m sure it has been already discussed in detail here, but could you remind me which such countries would be? (asking for a friend)
The map in this article may answer part of your friend‘s question 
The equally important question however is how the other country taxes the withdrawal.
So what’s the general consensus until the draft proposal is finalised?
I am thinking following -:
3a might still be okay as long as marginal rate is higher than expected lump sum rate for following reasons
2nd pillar - hold off voluntary purchases for following reasons
P.S -: I have to say this whole proposal (even not passed) has created a doubt in my mind about direction of policy in CH.
At this point in time, I’m pretty sure a very negative 3a reform can’t pass parliament, would be subject to referendum if it did and would not pass the popular vote in that case so I’m not reassessing my position vis-a-vis 3a at this point.
To be fair, I have the option to withdraw it early to repay part of my mortgage so I feel like I have an opt-out in case things get serious.
Edit: regarding 2nd pillar, I’m keeping my guidelines of withdrawing what I can when I can and buying back later on, either when I want bondlike investments or I’m near retirement/FIRE.
Tax increases are always negative . Doesn’t mean they do not get applied.
I believe this is a proposal and the end would be something else. But the direction is that capital withdrawal taxes will increase
Hopefully by not the proposed amount
