Retirement savings plan or assurance-vie: which investment truly prepares you for retirement?

Compare the PER and assurance-vie for your retirement

Enter your information: taxable income, marginal tax bracket, savings capacity, time horizon before retirement, and estimated marginal tax rate at retirement. The simulator compares the impact of the PER (Retirement Savings Plan) and assurance-vie on your final capital and suggests an allocation between the two. Your data is neither stored nor transmitted.

PER and assurance-vie do not answer the same question

Comparing a retirement savings plan with assurance-vie is flawed when framed as "which is better?" The two investment vehicles serve different purposes, and comparing them is like asking if a hammer is better than a screwdriver.

THE PER This addresses a tax question: how to reduce the tax burden on a high income today by locking in capital until retirement. Its mechanism is based on the deduction upon entry. Each euro invested is deducted from your taxable income, and the savings are equal to the investment multiplied by your marginal tax rate. In return, the capital is unavailable until retirement—except in cases of early withdrawal permitted by law—and will be taxed upon withdrawal.

L'’assurance-vie It addresses the question of flexibility and inheritance: how to grow capital while retaining control, with favorable tax treatment on gains after eight years and an advantageous inheritance framework. It offers no upfront deductions, but the capital remains accessible at any time.

The real question, therefore, is not "PER or assurance-vie," but "what portion of my retirement savings benefits from being tax-deductible, and what portion benefits from remaining flexible?" It's a trade-off, not a binary choice.

The 4 criteria that truly differentiate between a PER (Retirement Savings Plan) and assurance-vie

Criterion 1: Taxation upon entry

This is the unique advantage of the PER (Retirement Savings Plan). For a taxpayer in the 41% tax bracket (%), contributing €10,000 to a PER generates €4,100 in immediate tax savings. Assurance-vie offers no such advantage upon entry. The higher your marginal tax rate, the more significant this PER benefit becomes. Below the 30% tax bracket (%), it becomes marginal.

Criterion 2: Taxation upon exit

This is the point many people forget. The PER (Retirement Savings Plan) allows for tax deductions upon entry, but is taxed upon withdrawal: the capital received at retirement is taxable. The plan is only advantageous if your marginal tax rate (TMI) in retirement is lower than your TMI during your working life. If your retirement income keeps you in the same tax bracket, the benefit of the PER is significantly reduced. Assurance-vie, on the other hand, is only taxed on gains, with an annual allowance after eight years.

Criterion 3: availability of capital

Assurance-vie is the clear winner. The capital is available at any time, making it a useful tool for precautionary savings and financing intermediate projects. The PER (Retirement Savings Plan) locks in the capital until retirement, except in legally defined cases of early withdrawal—such as the purchase of a primary residence. For those who need flexibility, the PER's locked-in nature is a real cost, not a minor detail.

Criterion 4: Transmission

Assurance-vie offers a particularly favorable inheritance framework, with a tax allowance per beneficiary for premiums paid before a certain age. The PER (Retirement Savings Plan) has its own inheritance rules, which differ depending on whether death occurs before or after liquidation. For wealth management objectives that include a significant inheritance component, assurance-vie generally remains the preferred tool.

Case study: Hélène, 49 years old, architect in Lyon

Hélène is a self-employed professional with a marginal tax rate of 41% (%). She aims to retire at 66, a timeframe of 17 years, and can allocate €8,000 per year to her retirement preparation. The simulator compares the two extreme scenarios:

Reading the simulator doesn't determine a winner; it reveals a trade-off. Hélène has a high marginal tax rate—the PER (Retirement Savings Plan) is relevant for part of her effort. But she doesn't have any emergency savings and a possible real estate project in the medium term—locking up 100% of her savings would be unwise.

The allocation modeled by the tool for his profile: a majority in a PER (Retirement Savings Plan) to capture the 41% tax deduction, and a portion in assurance-vie to maintain flexibility and initiate a wealth transfer framework. The ideal outcome is not "PER" or "assurance-vie": it's a balance.

From comparison to retirement strategy

The simulator calculates the arbitrage costs. The construction of the retirement strategy then follows a three-step method:

1. Estimating the income shortfall. Before choosing a tool, you need to quantify the gap between your current income and your future pension. This shortfall determines the necessary savings effort — and therefore the scale of the problem.
2. Arbitration of the distribution. Retirement savings plans (PER), assurance-vie, and where applicable, real estate or other investment vehicles: the allocation is calibrated based on the marginal tax rate differential, the investment horizon, the need for liquidity, and the inheritance objective. It's rarely all one or the other.
3. Long-term management. A retirement strategy is not fixed. The marginal tax rate evolves, incomes change, the horizon approaches: the allocation must be reviewed, and the withdrawal from the PER — as an annuity or a lump sum, in one payment or in installments — must be prepared several years in advance.

Our enhanced wealth management intelligence models the income gap and the optimal allocation between investment vehicles. The strategy, its calibration, and its management over time are developed and signed by Alexis Sagnier.

Designed by Alexis Sagnier

Wealth Management Advisor, member of ANACOFI. Specialist in international wealth management, Alexis assists executives, expatriates and expatriate managers in optimizing their financial structure.

The simulator incorporates the 2026 macroeconomic parameters (Livret A rate, INSEE inflation, PFU taxation) and the allocation models used by the firm.