Article 83 simulator: defined contribution group retirement plan

Simulate your Article 83

The simulator estimates the capital accumulated and the tax savings on the deductible portion. Your data is neither stored nor transmitted.

Why does Article 83 primarily benefit the manager treated as an employee?

Article 83 targets a specific category of personnel—often managers or executives treated as employees. Once the plan is in place, contributions become mandatory: they are shared between the employer and the employee, deductible from the employee's taxable income up to a specific limit, and deductible from the company's profits. It is this mandatory and categorical nature that distinguishes it from voluntary savings.

For the executive treated as an employee—such as the president of a simplified joint-stock company (SAS) or a minority shareholder in a limited liability company (SARL)—the benefit is twofold. Firstly, they build up supplementary retirement savings, partly funded by the company through employer contributions. Secondly, their own contributions are tax-deductible, up to a limit specific to this type of plan. The company thus co-finances their retirement, providing a tax advantage for both parties.

However, the system is demanding: it requires defining an objective category of beneficiaries, setting a contribution level, and adhering to specific social and accounting formalities. If poorly structured, it can be reclassified and lose its advantages. Its implementation requires consulting on social protection and executive compensation, not simply a subscription.

The 3 levers that this simulator illuminates

Lever 1: Have your retirement co-financed by the company

The employer's contribution under Article 83 is deductible from the company's profit and exempt from standard social security contributions (excluding the flat-rate social security contribution). For the company director treated as an employee, this is a way to transfer company value to their personal retirement savings at a significantly lower tax and social security cost than a salary supplement. The precise calculation of the employer's contribution, while respecting its categorical and mandatory nature, is crucial in this regard.

Lever 2: Stacking retirement deduction limits

The employee contribution to Article 83 is deducted from taxable income up to a specific limit, which is coordinated with the limits of the individual retirement savings plan (PER). With careful management, executives can combine different investment vehicles—Article 83 and voluntary contributions to the PER—to maximize the overall deduction. The common mistake is to treat each scheme in isolation; optimization lies in understanding how the limits are coordinated, something that distributors rarely explain.

Lever 3: Transfer to the mandatory company retirement savings plan at the right time

Since the PACTE law, new pension plans take the form of the mandatory company retirement savings plan (PERO), which follows the logic of Article 83 while adding the possibility of a lump-sum withdrawal from certain investment compartments. Existing Article 83 contracts can be transferred to this plan. Deciding to transfer—and when—can unlock a level of withdrawal flexibility not available in the original contract. This is a technical decision that should be made in consultation with an advisor.

Case study: Olivier, 49 years old, president of a consulting firm in Paris

Olivier, president of a simplified joint-stock company (SAS) and therefore considered an employee, sets up an Article 83 plan for the "executives" category. The total annual contribution is €8,000, of which €5,000 is paid by the company and €3,000 by him. He is in the marginal tax bracket of 41 %. Here is the effect upon entry:

Each year, Olivier's supplementary pension is increased by €8,000, of which €5,000 is funded by the company through a tax-deductible employer contribution. His own contribution of €3,000 saves him approximately €1,230 in taxes at the 41 % tax bracket. The company thus co-finances his pension at a significantly lower tax and social security cost than an equivalent salary supplement.

The lesson for an executive treated as an employee: Article 83 allows the company to bear part of the retirement contribution, with a tax advantage for both parties upon entry. However, it is essential to respect the mandatory and categorical nature of the plan, otherwise it may be reclassified—and to consider, in the long term, transferring to a mandatory company retirement savings plan (PER) to gain greater flexibility upon withdrawal.

A technical system at the service of the leader and managers

This simulator estimates the accumulated capital and the tax savings on the deductible portion. However, structuring an Article 83 plan—choosing the objective category, contribution level, integration with other retirement and compensation schemes, and the possibility of transferring to a PERO (French Individual Retirement Savings Plan)—requires specialized advice. If poorly designed, the plan loses its advantages; if well-structured, it allows the company to co-finance the executive's retirement.

Balmont Conseil is an objective wealth management firm, a member of ANACOFI, with no capital ties to any bank or insurer. This objectivity allows us to structure the plan and select the contract from across the market, aligning it with your overall compensation, solely in your best interest. Let's make an appointment to design your executive supplemental retirement plan.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a "defined contribution" plan?

In a defined contribution plan like Article 83, the amount of contributions paid is known in advance, but not the level of the final pension, which depends on the performance of the investments. This is the opposite of Article 39 (supplementary pension), a defined benefit plan, where the level of the pension is guaranteed and the company bears the financial risk.

How are the contributions under Article 83 deducted?

The employee's contribution is deductible from their taxable income up to a specific limit, unique to this type of plan, which is aligned with the individual retirement savings plan (PER). The employer's contribution is deductible from the company's profit and exempt from standard social security contributions, excluding the employer's social security levy. The mandatory and category-based nature of the plan determines eligibility for these benefits.

Can a manager benefit from this?

Yes, provided they are considered an employee—such as the president or CEO of a simplified joint-stock company (SAS), or a minority shareholder in a limited liability company (SARL)—and fall into an objective category of personnel covered by the scheme. This is precisely one of the advantages of the system: allowing executives to build up supplementary retirement savings co-financed by the company, with a tax benefit upon enrollment.

What happens to Article 83 with the PACTE law?

Since the PACTE law, new pension plans take the form of the mandatory company retirement savings plan (PERO), which follows the logic of Article 83 while adding the possibility of a lump-sum withdrawal from certain sub-funds. Existing Article 83 contracts can be transferred to the PERO. Withdrawal from Article 83 itself is primarily in the form of a lifetime annuity, with the option of a lump-sum withdrawal from the voluntary portion.

What is the difference between Balmont Conseil and a bank advisor?

Balmont Conseil is a consulting firm, a member of ANACOFI, with no financial ties to any bank or insurer. We structure the plan, select the contract from across the market, and integrate it with your overall executive compensation. While a bank advisor or insurance agent distributes their network's product, we design a customized plan, avoiding the pitfalls of reclassification, solely in your best interest.