Article 82 Simulator: Individual Supplementary Retirement Insurance

Simulate your Article 82

The simulator projects the accumulated capital at maturity. Your data is neither stored nor transmitted.

Why Article 82 trades tax advantages for freedom

Most company pension plans rely on an implicit bargain: a tax advantage upon joining in exchange for locking up savings until retirement. Article 82 reverses this bargain. It offers no deductions—the employer's contribution is treated as overtime pay, taxable upon joining as a salary supplement. In return, it offers what these locked-in plans deny: access to funds.

This freedom is a game-changer for some individuals. The capital isn't locked in until retirement: it can be accessed whenever the account holder wishes, and it's passed on to their beneficiaries. For an executive who wants flexible savings rather than a distant annuity, or for those whose assets are already heavily invested in rigid plans, this liquid asset has real value.

Article 82 is therefore used less as a tax avoidance tool than as an instrument for deferred compensation and employee retention. A company can use it to reward a senior executive or key manager by offering them readily available and transferable savings—a complement to, not a substitute for, tax-advantaged schemes.

The 3 levers that this simulator allows you to think about

Lever 1: Availability as a value in itself

Unlike the PER (Retirement Savings Plan) or Article 83, the capital in Article 82 is not locked in until retirement. For an executive with an uncertain future—a potential sale of their business, a personal project, or a need for liquidity—this flexibility is often more valuable than the tax advantages of a locked-in plan. Article 82 serves as the liquid component of a retirement strategy, its size determined in relation to other locked-in investments.

Lever 2: supplement, not replace, deductible devices

Article 82 becomes particularly relevant as a supplement. A business owner who has already exhausted their deduction limits—individual retirement savings plan (PER) or Article 83—and wants to continue building savings through the company can use Article 82 for the portion that would no longer qualify for tax advantages upon contribution. They are essentially exchanging a tax benefit they've already used up for a degree of flexibility they previously lacked. This is an allocation decision, not a default choice.

Lever 3: the transmission, an angle rarely used

The Article 82 contract can benefit the policyholder's heirs: it serves as a vehicle for transferring assets, in addition to being readily available savings. For a business owner already planning the transfer of their wealth, this feature deserves to be considered in their overall strategy—beneficiary clause, integration with assurance-vie, and estate planning objectives. This is an aspect that standard marketing presentations almost always overlook.

Case study: Florence, 53 years old, salaried general manager in Aix-en-Provence

Florence, a salaried managing director, benefits from an Article 82 plan financed by her company: €300 monthly contributions over 12 years, with a net return of 4,% after fees. The contribution is taxable upon entry, but the capital remains available. Here is the projection:

Florence forgoes the tax advantage upon entry—her contribution is taxed as a salary supplement—but gains a freedom that neither the PER (Retirement Savings Plan) nor Article 83 offers: her capital of approximately €55,000 remains available at any time and can be transferred. For an executive whose career path is constantly evolving and who has already exhausted her tax-deductible allowances, this liquid asset is more valuable than the tax savings she would have obtained through a more restrictive scheme.

The lesson: Article 82 cannot be compared to a PER (Retirement Savings Plan) solely on tax grounds—it would be at a disadvantage. It should be judged on the freedom and transferability it offers, in addition to deductible provisions. It's a trade-off between immediate benefit and availability, to be decided according to the executive's overall situation, never by isolating the tax rate alone.

Freedom comes at a price — sometimes it's worth it.

This simulator projects the accumulated capital at maturity. However, the value of Article 82 isn't solely determined by this figure: it lies in the availability and transferability it offers, compared to existing tax-deductible schemes. Should you prioritize the tax advantages of a structured investment regime, or the freedom of access to liquid assets? The answer depends on your investment horizon, your existing deduction limits, and your estate planning goals.

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 objectively compare Article 82, PER, and Article 83 plans, and to select the contract best suited to your needs across the entire market—not based on the product a network is trying to sell. Let's make an appointment to arbitrate between tax advantage and freedom.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why doesn't Article 82 offer an entry deduction?

Because the employer's contribution is treated as a salary supplement, and therefore taxable upon entry, unlike in a PER (Retirement Savings Plan) or Article 83 plan where it is deductible. This is the price of its flexibility: by forgoing the immediate tax advantage, the account holder gains access to their capital and its transferability. It's a trade-off between tax advantage and freedom.

Is the capital truly available before retirement?

Yes, that's the key feature of Article 82: unlike the PER (Retirement Savings Plan) and Article 83, the capital isn't locked in until retirement. The account holder can withdraw it whenever they want. This flexibility makes it a valuable source of liquidity, especially for an executive whose career prospects are uncertain or who has already exhausted their tax-deductible allowances.

Is Article 82 transferable?

Yes, the contract can benefit the policyholder's heirs, making it a vehicle for transferring assets in addition to providing readily available savings. This feature deserves to be considered within a comprehensive wealth management strategy, in conjunction with assurance-vie and estate planning—an aspect often overlooked in standard marketing materials.

For whom is Article 82 relevant?

It is typically aimed at senior executives whom the company wants to offer a flexible and loyalty-building savings plan, or at managers whose assets are already heavily invested in complex investment vehicles and who are looking to add a liquid asset. It is not a tax-saving tool, but rather an instrument for deferred compensation and wealth transfer: it complements deductible schemes, it does not replace them.

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

Balmont Conseil is a firm, a member of ANACOFI, with no financial ties to any bank or insurer. We objectively compare Article 82, PER, and Article 83 plans based on your individual circumstances and select the most suitable contract from the entire market. While a bank advisor or insurance agent might promote a product from their network, we weigh tax advantages against flexibility, acting solely in your best interest, without favoring any particular product.