{"id":7428,"date":"2026-10-29T17:46:44","date_gmt":"2026-10-29T16:46:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/balmontconseil.com\/?p=7428"},"modified":"2026-10-29T17:46:44","modified_gmt":"2026-10-29T16:46:44","slug":"per-ou-assurance-vie-avocat-liberal-41-pour-cent-retraite","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/balmontconseil.com\/en\/blog\/per-ou-assurance-vie-avocat-liberal-41-pour-cent-retraite\/","title":{"rendered":"Should a self-employed lawyer with a tax liability of 41,130% choose between a PER (retirement savings plan) or life insurance for their retirement?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

In summary\u2026<\/h2>\n

The two, in this order: the PER (retirement savings plan) up to the deduction limit, then life insurance for the rest.<\/b> In the typical case (payment of \u20ac10,000 per year for 20 years, return of 3.% per year, calculation assumption), each year the PER saves \u20ac4,100<\/b> tax (marginal tax bracket of 41 %). Withdrawn at age 67 over 10 years, the portion of contributions deducted is taxed at 30%<\/b> instead of 41 %, this represents \u20ac22,000 less tax than if the bracket remained at 41 %. With the same effort of \u20ac10,000 per year, the combination of a PER followed by life insurance leaves \u20ac292,454 net after tax<\/b>, against \u20ac255,009<\/b> for life insurance alone, that is \u20ac37,445 more<\/b>. The French National Bar Association Pension Fund (CNBF) only pays out 44% of the income here: the PER (Retirement Savings Plan) does not replace the fund, it supplements part of it. Life insurance retains its role: it remains accessible, and its gains are taxed at 7.5% after 8 years (under \u20ac150,000 in premiums), after an annual allowance of \u20ac4,600.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

1. What the PER does, step by step<\/strong><\/h2>\n

The PER (retirement savings plan) is tax-deductible upon contribution and taxable upon withdrawal. Life insurance works in the opposite way: no tax advantage upon contribution, and reduced taxation on gains upon withdrawal. The entire comparison hinges on the difference between the tax bracket upon contribution and the tax bracket upon withdrawal. The pension amount in this typical case comes from our article on lawyer retirement at the CNBF (National Bar Association Pension Fund).<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Step<\/th>\nRule in 2026<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Entry: tax saving<\/td>\nVoluntary contributions are deducted from taxable income, unless the taxpayer opts for non-deduction. The savings are equal to the contribution multiplied by the marginal tax bracket: at 41 %, \u20ac0.41 per euro paid<\/b>, at 30 %, \u20ac0.30. The 2026 scale applies 41 % from \u20ac84,578 to \u20ac181,917 of income per share, and 30 % from \u20ac29,580 to \u20ac84,577 (law no. 2026-103, article 4).<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Entry: ceiling for a self-employed worker<\/td>\nThe higher of two amounts: 10 % of the previous year's profit<\/b> (withheld up to 8 times the annual social security ceiling) or 10 % of this ceiling<\/b>, This amounts to a minimum of \u20ac4,710 for a payment in 2026. Occupational pension contributions already deducted from the previous year's profit are reduced, except for a portion equal to 15 % of the profit between 1 and 8 times the ceiling. Any unused ceiling can be carried forward to the following five years.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Capital withdrawal: contributions deducted<\/td>\nThe portion corresponding to the deducted payments is added to other income and is taxed according to the scale<\/b>, without social security contributions and without the 10 % reduction<\/b> pensions. She is eligible for the income averaging mechanism for exceptional income.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Capital withdrawal: gains<\/td>\nSingle flat-rate levy of 31.4%<\/b> For interest received since January 1, 2026: 12.8% tax and 18.6% social security contributions. The option to apply the standard tax scale remains available.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Lump-sum withdrawal: contributions not deducted<\/td>\nIf the payment was not deducted, the corresponding portion of capital is exempt from income tax and social security contributions. Only the gains are taxed (31.4 %).<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Annuity payout: payments deducted<\/td>\nThe annuity is taxed as a retirement pension, with a 10% allowance (capped at \u20ac4,439 per household for 2025 income). Social security contributions of 18.6% are levied on a portion of the annuity that depends on the age at the first payment: 70% before age 50, 50% from age 50 to 59., 40 % aged 60 to 69<\/b>, 30 % from age 70.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Annuity payout: payments not deducted<\/td>\nThe annuity falls under the regime of life annuities for valuable consideration: only a fraction is taxable (70 %, 50 %, 40 % or 30 % depending on the age at the first payment), and social security contributions of 18.6 % apply to it.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Withdrawal before retirement<\/td>\nPossible in cases of early release as provided for in Article L. 224-4 of the Monetary and Financial Code.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/figure>\n

Our page Individual PER<\/a> details how the contract works, and the article on the deduction ceiling and the 2026 finance law<\/a> details the calculation of the ceiling.<\/p>\n

2. What life insurance does after 8 years<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Point<\/th>\nRule in 2026<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Contract of less than 8 years<\/td>\nGains taxed at 12.8 % (or at the scale by option), without allowance.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Contract of 8 years or more: discount<\/td>\nThe redeemed gains benefit from an annual allowance of \u20ac4,600<\/b> for a single person, \u20ac9,200<\/b> for a couple subject to joint taxation. It is a single agreement for all contracts within the household, does not carry over from one year to the next, and does not affect social security contributions.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Contract of 8 years or more: rate<\/td>\nAfter the initial shock, 7.5%<\/b> as long as the total of premiums paid and not reimbursed as capital, across all contracts, does not exceed \u20ac150,000<\/b> as of December 31 of the previous year. Beyond that date, the 7.5% % rate applies only to the portion of earnings equal to \u20ac150,000 (less premiums paid before September 27, 2017, that have not been reimbursed) divided by the premiums paid since that date that have not been reimbursed; the remainder is taxed at 12.8% %. The allowance is first applied to the portion taxed at 7.5% %.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Social charges<\/td>\n17.2%<\/b> on the gains (principle rate).<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Partial buyout<\/td>\nOnly the portion of gains contained in the redemption is taxed: redemption less premiums paid multiplied by redemption divided by the value of the contract.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Scale option<\/td>\nPossible, explicitly, comprehensively, and irrevocably. The calculation below does not include it.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/figure>\n

3. Calculation based on a lawyer at 41 %<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Calculation assumption<\/th>\nValue retained<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Lawyer<\/td>\n47 years old, single (1 share), taxable income of \u20ac100,000 before payment: marginal tax bracket at 41 %, and income remains above \u20ac84,577 after deduction (\u20ac90,000)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Payments<\/td>\n\u20ac10,000 per year on the PER for 20 years, from age 47 to 67, within the deduction limit (10% of a profit of \u20ac100,000), without any other occupational retirement contract deducted from the profit<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Yield<\/td>\n3 % per year, net of fees, identical for the PER and for life insurance (calculation assumption), payments at the end of the year<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Tax saving<\/td>\nCalculated in the year of payment, without delay; it amounts to \u20ac4,100 per year (2026 scale, calculated before and after deduction)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Scale and rates<\/td>\nThe 2026 tax brackets and social security contribution rates remain unchanged until retirement; calculation is based solely on the tax brackets, without any discounts or tax reductions.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Retirement at 67<\/td>\nPension of \u20ac44,100 per year (CNBF estimate at age 67 for a 35-year career with \u20ac100,000 in earnings, basic and supplementary pension schemes combined, see our article on lawyers' retirement), with no other income; 10% tax allowance of \u20ac4,410, resulting in \u20ac39,690 taxable income and \u20ac5,011 tax before any withdrawal from the PER (Retirement Savings Plan).<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Capital exit<\/td>\n10 equal annual withdrawals from age 67 to 76, with no return after age 67 (simplifying assumption that isolates the effect of tax); the income-averaging mechanism is not modeled.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Annuity payout<\/td>\nConversion rate of 4 % of capital at age 67 (calculation assumption)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Assurance-vie<\/td>\nContract of more than 8 years, no other contract in the household, 10 equal annual redemptions from age 67 to 76, social security contributions of 17.2% on gains, rates of 7.5% and 12.8% spread each year according to the remaining premiums<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/figure>\n
\n

Typical case<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Situation.<\/b> A 47-year-old lawyer, practicing as a sole practitioner, single, has \u20ac100,000 of taxable profit and \u20ac10,000 per year to put aside for his retirement until age 67.<\/p>\n

Issue.<\/b> He is hesitating between the PER (Retirement Savings Plan), which reduces his taxes immediately, and life insurance, which remains accessible and whose gains are taxed at a low rate after 8 years. Every euro paid into the PER will be taxed again upon withdrawal: the advantage only exists if the withdrawal tax bracket is lower than the contribution bracket.<\/p>\n

Strategy.<\/b> He compares four investment strategies. Strategy 1: \u20ac10,000 per year in life insurance. Strategy 2: \u20ac10,000 per year in a retirement savings plan (PER), of which \u20ac4,100 is tax-deductible, resulting in a net cost of \u20ac5,900. Strategy 3: this \u20ac5,900 invested in life insurance. Strategy 4: \u20ac10,000 per year in a PER, with the \u20ac4,100 tax-deductible investment in life insurance, resulting in a net cost of \u20ac10,000, the same as Strategy 1. At age 67, he withdraws the capital from the PER over 10 years.<\/p>\n

Result.<\/b> Assembly 4 leaves \u20ac292,454 net<\/b> after tax, versus \u20ac255,009<\/b> for assembly 1, i.e. \u20ac37,445 more<\/b> with the same effort. The PER alone leaves \u20ac187,131 for \u20ac5,900 of effort per year, compared to \u20ac151,563 for the same amount in life insurance.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Capital at age 67 and exit tax<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Assembly<\/th>\nNet effort per year<\/th>\nCapital at 67 years old<\/th>\nincluding earnings<\/th>\nTax and charges on exit<\/th>\nNet after tax<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
1. Life insurance alone<\/td>\n\u20ac10,000<\/td>\n\u20ac268,704<\/td>\n\u20ac68,704<\/td>\n\u20ac13,694<\/td>\n\u20ac255,009<\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2. PER alone<\/td>\n\u20ac5,900<\/td>\n\u20ac268,704<\/td>\n\u20ac68,704<\/td>\n\u20ac81,573<\/td>\n\u20ac187,131<\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
3. Life insurance alone, same effort as the PER<\/td>\n\u20ac5,900<\/td>\n\u20ac158,535<\/td>\n\u20ac40,535<\/td>\n\u20ac6,972<\/td>\n\u20ac151,563<\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
4. PER, then tax savings through life insurance<\/td>\n\u20ac10,000<\/td>\n\u20ac378,872<\/td>\n\u20ac96,872<\/td>\n\u20ac86,418<\/td>\n\u20ac292,454<\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/figure>\n

Details of the PER lump sum withdrawal<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Item<\/th>\nBase<\/th>\nRate<\/th>\nAmount<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Payments deducted and withdrawn (scale)<\/td>\n\u20ac200,000<\/td>\n30 % (retirement bracket)<\/td>\n\u20ac60,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Withdrawals (single flat-rate deduction)<\/td>\n\u20ac68,704<\/td>\n31.4%<\/td>\n\u20ac21,573<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Total at exit<\/b><\/td>\n\u20ac268,704<\/td>\n30.4 % of the capital<\/td>\n\u20ac81,573<\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/figure>\n

Each year of withdrawal adds \u20ac20,000 in deducted contributions to the \u20ac39,690 of taxable pension income. The total (\u20ac59,690) remains below \u20ac84,577: the entire portion is taxed at 30% of the % tax bracket. The 30% bracket leaves \u20ac44,887 of taxable income each year before reaching \u20ac41%, so \u20ac20,000 only uses up \u20ac45% of that taxable income. Withdrawn in a single year, the same \u20ac200,000 portion would incur \u20ac79,373 in tax instead of \u20ac60,000, not including the income averaging factor, which we have not modeled. Spreading the output is the first lever of the PER.<\/b><\/p>\n

What if the pension bracket doesn't decrease at retirement?<\/strong><\/h3>\n

The lawyer who retains \u20ac90,000 of taxable income per year in retirement (rent, consulting work) remains at 41% of the tax bracket upon withdrawal. The tax on deducted contributions then rises to \u20ac82,000, exactly the savings achieved upon entry, and the PER alone leaves \u20ac165,131 compared to \u20ac151,563 for life insurance with the same effort, a difference of \u20ac13,568. The advantage remains, but it is reduced: it no longer stems from the difference in tax brackets, but solely from the fact that the tax savings of 41% increase the invested capital over 20 years, with gains taxed at 31%. At a difference of \u20ac35,568 versus \u20ac13,568, The reduction in the retirement bracket costs approximately \u20ac22,000.<\/b> in the result.<\/p>\n

Capital or annuity<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Exit<\/th>\nGross amount<\/th>\nTaxes and levies<\/th>\nDetail<\/th>\nPortion retained<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Capital spread over 10 years<\/td>\n\u20ac268,704<\/td>\n\u20ac81,573<\/td>\n\u20ac60,000 according to the tax brackets on deducted payments, \u20ac21,573 flat-rate levy on gains<\/td>\n69.6%<\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Annuity at 4 % of the capital<\/td>\n\u20ac10,748 per year<\/td>\n\u20ac4,015 per year<\/td>\n\u20ac3,216 in income tax and \u20ac800 in social security contributions (18.6 % out of 40 % of the annuity)<\/td>\n62.6%<\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/figure>\n

The annuity is added to the \u20ac44,100 pension. It remains in the 30% tax bracket and benefits from the 10% allowance, already capped at \u20ac4,439: the additional allowance is \u20ac29. It is subject to social security contributions on 40% of its amount, which are not levied on contributions withdrawn as a lump sum. The lump sum therefore retains a larger share of each euro withdrawn (69.6% compared to 62.6%); the annuity provides a lifetime income, which is not subject to any withdrawal rules.<\/p>\n

What the \u20ac150,000 threshold costs in life insurance<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Scheme 1 pays out \u20ac200,000 in premiums, above the \u20ac150,000 threshold: during the first few years of redemption, a portion of the gains increases to 12.8%. The additional cost of this effect alone is \u20ac174 in income tax on the entire withdrawal. This is low because the \u20ac4,600 allowance absorbs most of the gains from each redemption. In Scheme 4, the life insurance policy receives only \u20ac82,000 in premiums: it remains below the threshold, and its gains of \u20ac2,817 per year remain below the allowance. without income tax<\/b>. Only the social security contributions of 17.2 % (\u20ac4,845) remain due.<\/p>\n

4. The combination for an avocado whose slice is falling<\/strong><\/h2>\n