Assurance-vie for a married couple: contract taken out with joint funds and inheritance

For estates opened since January 1, 2016, the tax authorities accept that the surrender value of an unredeemed assurance-vie policy taken out with joint funds is not included in the marital community's assets for tax purposes. It is not subject to inheritance tax when the death of a spouse does not terminate the policy. If the death of the insured does terminate the policy, the sums paid to the beneficiaries remain subject, as applicable, to the levies under Article 757 B or Article 990 I of the French General Tax Code (CGI).

This page addresses the tax implications of this rule, as outlined in the official tax guidelines (BOFiP). It does not cover civil law aspects: matrimonial property regimes, reimbursements, or the rights of the surviving spouse. The BOFiP section dedicated to these contracts does not address them, and we do not supplement it.

Two situations to distinguish

The doctrine distinguishes between two cases for a contract entered into by spouses using joint funds during the marriage (the "joint funds" being the couple's common funds):

• the contract is not resolved upon the death of one of the spouses; ;
• the contract is untied due to the death of one of the spouses.

The table summarizes what the text says for each case. The third line recalls a general rule of the BOFiP, which does not only apply to married couples.

Unfulfilled contract: the rule accepted since 2016

Paragraph 380 of the BOFiP states that the previous doctrine has been withdrawn. It specified that the surrender value of contracts taken out with common funds "was part of the community property subject to inheritance tax under the conditions of common law" (Ministerial Response Bacquet No. 26231, JO National Assembly of 29 June 2010).

The current wording is as follows: for estates opened on or after January 1, 2016, it is now accepted that the surrender value of a assurance-vie policy taken out with joint funds and not yet redeemed "is not, for tax purposes, included in the assets of the marital community upon its liquidation." The text adds that this is the case "regardless of the status of the designated beneficiaries.".

He draws the following conclusion: the surrender value is not considered part of the estate for the purpose of calculating inheritance tax owed by the heirs of the deceased spouse (Ministerial Response Ciot No. 78192, Official Journal of the National Assembly, February 23, 2016). In the event of death that does not result in the termination of the contract, the surrender value of the contract is not subject to inheritance tax.

Contract terminated: the capital remains outside the estate, but it is taxed according to the circumstances

When the insured's death terminates the contract, the BOFiP (Official Bulletin of Public Finances) cites Article L. 132-12 of the Insurance Code. The capital or annuity payable to a designated beneficiary, or to their heirs, does not form part of the insured's estate. The beneficiary is deemed to have had sole entitlement to it from the date of the contract.

The sums paid remain subject, as applicable, to Article 757 B or Article 990 I of the French General Tax Code (CGI), under the standard rules. Details can be found on our page dedicated to these two articles. The guidelines provided by impots.gouv.fr (page updated on 22/07/2026) for contracts taken out since October 13, 1998 are as follows:

• Premiums paid before the insured person turns 70: exemption (allowance) of €152,500 per beneficiary. Beyond this amount, a levy of 20% (%) applies to the first bracket. The threshold for the next bracket and its rate should be verified with the source (impots.gouv.fr, article 990 I of the French General Tax Code): this page does not include this information. ;
• premiums paid after the insured person turns 70: the sums from the premiums paid are taken into account in the estate, after a deduction of €30,500, global for all the contracts of the deceased; ;
• The deceased's married or civil partner is among the exempt beneficiaries.

What this page doesn't say

The section of the BOFiP (Official Bulletin of Public Finances) dedicated to spousal contracts does not name any matrimonial property regime. It does not address the surviving spouse or reimbursements. Therefore, this page does not address them either, and derives no rules from them.

It also does not address:

• estates opened before January 1, 2016; ;
• contracts signed before October 13, 1998; ;
• contracts entered into under conditions other than those of the text (joint funds, during the marriage); ;
• the amount of inheritance tax due on the remainder of the estate.

Numerical example (fictitious profile)

Situation. Marc and Hélène are married under a community property regime (hypothetical scenario). In 2012, during their marriage, Marc took out a assurance-vie policy using joint funds. Its surrender value is €240,000. The other community assets are worth €600,000 (hypothetical scenario). Hélène dies in 2026. Her death does not terminate the policy.

Issue. Is the buyback value of €240,000 included, for tax purposes, in the assets of the marital community?

Strategy. Apply paragraph 380 of the BOFiP, for an estate opened after January 1, 2016.

Result. The community property used for tax purposes is €600,000. According to the doctrine reported in 2016, it would have been €840,000. The difference is €240,000: the surrender value of the contract is not subject to inheritance tax. These amounts do not constitute the tax base for the heirs; they serve only to illustrate the effect of the rule on the community property.

To illustrate the contrast, let's assume that Marc, the insured, dies and the policy is settled in favor of his son, the sole beneficiary. Assumptions: the policy was taken out after October 13, 1998; all premiums were paid before Marc turned 70; the son is not an exempt beneficiary; Marc has no other policies benefiting his son; and all parties involved are residents of France. The capital is €240,000. The portion exceeding the exemption of €152,500 is €87,500. At the 20% tax rate for the first bracket, the levy is €17,500, leaving €222,500 of capital.

These profiles are fictional. The two scenarios describe different events: they are not meant to be compared for the purpose of choosing. The calculation does not indicate the share of the inheritance that each heir receives, nor the taxes due on other assets: these points fall under civil law and the rest of the estate, which are not addressed here. The figures illustrate the calculation. They do not predict your specific situation.

What changes depending on your situation

• The contract's resolution. Does the death in question trigger the termination of the contract? The two cases are governed by different rules.
• The date the estate was opened. The rule described applies to estates opened on or after January 1, 2016.
• The beneficiary clause. With a designated beneficiary, the capital is outside the estate. Without a designated beneficiary, it is included in the estate.
• The subscription date and the insured's age at each payment. They direct you to article 990 I or article 757 B.
• The quality of the beneficiary. The married or civil partner is among the exempt beneficiaries.
• The origin of the funds and the matrimonial property regime. These points are not addressed here: they are examined on a case-by-case basis.

No general rule can replace reading your contract, its clauses, and your marital status. No results are guaranteed.