Home / Resources / Simulators / PERCO / collective PER
Free simulator
Company group retirement savings plan (formerly PERCO) simulator: retirement capital and employer matching contributions
The company-sponsored group retirement savings plan (PER), created by the PACTE law, replaced the PERCO (which can no longer be set up since October 1, 2020). It's the retirement equivalent of the PEE (company savings plan): it accommodates your employee savings, employer matching contributions—often more generous because they are geared towards a longer time horizon—and your unused vacation days. The portion derived from employee savings and employer matching contributions is exempt from income tax; only social security contributions are levied on the gains.
Free of income tax and often higher than on the PEE
As capital or annuity, unlike the old PERCO
Incentive bonus, profit-sharing and untaken CET days
The simulator
Simulate your collective PER
The simulator isolates the cumulative employer matching. Your data is neither stored nor transmitted.
Collective PER Simulator
Project your collective company retirement savings and the related employer matching.
Indicative calculation, based on 2026 rules and the assumptions entered above.
Why
Why the collective PER is the retirement weapon of well-placed employees
The collective company PER combines two logics that, apart, do not carry the same weight: the discipline of retirement savings built up until you leave work, and the power of employer matching. Because it targets a long horizon, matching is often more generous than on the PEE — the employer agrees to match more generously savings it knows are locked in until retirement.
Its strength lies in what you pay into it rather than draw. Incentive bonuses, profit-sharing and untaken CET days, directed into the collective PER, escape income tax and attract matching, instead of being paid out and taxed. For an employee whose company has negotiated a good agreement, the cumulative effect over a career is considerable.
The PACTE reform removed the last drawback of the old PERCO: payout as capital is now possible, whereas the former scheme favoured an annuity. The portion from employee savings and matching comes out free of income tax — only social charges apply to the gains. Deducted voluntary payments, for their part, follow the rules of the individual PER.
What the calculation shows
The 3 levers this simulator highlights
Because the collective PER locks savings in until retirement, employers often match more generously than on the PEE (company savings plan). Maxing out this matching contribution is the first reflex: every euro you pay in triggers the employer's top-up, which is exempt from income tax. Paying in at least up to the retirement plan's matching ceiling, even before funding other wrappers, maximises the ‘free money’ share of your retirement savings.
Paid out, incentive bonuses and profit-sharing are taxed; paid into the collective PER, they are exempt and trigger matching. Untaken days of leave, held in a time-savings account (CET), can also feed the plan. Systematically directing these flows into the collective PER rather than cashing them turns taxed bonuses into tax-free, matched retirement savings — a choice to renew every year.
Since PACTE, at retirement you choose between capital, annuity or a mix. The choice matters: the portion from employee savings comes out free of income tax (gains subject to social charges), while deducted voluntary payments follow the rules of the individual PER. The right choice depends on your other retirement income, your need for liquidity and your wealth transfer objective — a calculation to frame before you retire, never in a rush.
Case study
Case study: Nathalie, 50, sales manager at a mid-sized company in Lille
Each year Nathalie directs her incentive bonus and profit-sharing — about €3,000 — into her company's collective PER, which matches at 50%. Over 12 years, at a 4% return, here is the effect of the matching alone:
| Indicator | Bonuses paid out and taxed | Bonuses paid into the collective PER | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual contribution | ≈ €3,000 | ≈ €3,000 | — |
| Tax on the way in (marginal tax rate 30%) | ≈ €900/year | €0 | exempt |
| Employer matching (50%) | €0 | ≈ €1,500/year | +€1,500/year |
| Capital built up over 12 years | ≈ €25,400 (net of income tax) | ≈ €55,800 | ×2.2 |
By directing her bonuses into the collective PER rather than drawing them, Nathalie avoids income tax on the way in and captures €1,500 of matching each year. Over twelve years, her retirement capital reaches more than twice what she would have kept by cashing and paying tax on her bonuses. On exit, the portion from employee savings and matching will be free of income tax — only social charges will apply to the gains.
The lesson: when the company has a good employee savings agreement, drawing your bonuses rather than directing them into the collective PER is a costly mistake. The gap comes not from market returns, but from the exemption on the way in and the matching. What remains, when the time comes, is to choose between capital and annuity — in light of your overall wealth position.
In practice
Pay in rather than draw, then choose how to exit
This simulator isolates the employer matching. But the effectiveness of the collective PER plays out as a whole: systematic direction of incentive bonuses, profit-sharing and the CET, maxing out the matching, and above all the capital/annuity choice at exit, coordinated with your other retirement income and your wealth transfer objective. It is this overall view that turns a good company scheme into a retirement strategy.
Balmont Conseil is a wealth management firm based in Lyon, a member of ANACOFI-CIF, with no capital ties to any bank. Open architecture lets us analyse your company scheme as it stands and build it into your overall retirement strategy. Let's book an appointment to optimise your employee savings and prepare your exit choice.
Frequently asked questions
What clients ask us.
What is the difference between the PERCO and the collective company PER?
The company-sponsored group retirement savings plan (PER), created by the PACTE law, is the successor to the PERCO. The major difference lies in the payout options: the former PERCO prioritized annuities, while the group PER now allows for withdrawals as a lump sum, an annuity, or a combination thereof. Existing PERCOs can be retained or converted into group PERs. The advantages—employee contribution exempt from income tax, funding through employee savings plans—are maintained and enhanced.
How is a payout from the collective PER taxed?
The portion from employee savings and employer matching comes out free of income tax; only social charges apply to the gains. By contrast, voluntary payments you have deducted follow the rules of the individual PER: they are added back to income tax, and the corresponding gains are taxed at the flat rate. The distinction is essential when choosing how to exit.
What can I pay into a collective PER?
The collective PER is funded by your incentive bonus, your profit-sharing, your untaken days of leave held in a time-savings account, the employer's matching, and your voluntary payments. Directing the incentive bonus and profit-sharing into the plan, rather than drawing them, avoids income tax on these sums while capturing the matching.
Should you take capital or an annuity at retirement?
There is no universal answer. Payout as capital offers liquidity and flexibility for passing on wealth; an annuity guarantees income for life but generally ends on death. The right choice depends on your other retirement income, your need for liquidity, your life expectancy and your wealth objective. It is a decision to frame with an adviser before you retire, never in haste.
What is the difference between Balmont Conseil and a bank adviser?
Balmont Conseil is a wealth management advisory firm, a member of ANACOFI-CIF, with no capital ties to any bank. We analyse your company scheme and integrate it into your overall retirement strategy. A bank adviser reasons product by product within their network; we reason in terms of overall optimisation — allocation of bonuses, maximising the employer matching contribution, choice of exit option — in your interest.
