I honestly find it difficult to choose a more complex form of investment with obligations and intermediaries just because you are betting on a tax advantage that you won't benefit from for another 40 years. Tax legislation on pensions may change umpteen times between now and then. It may be worth it in individual cases, but there are just far too many variables in there for my taste that have to fit and stay fit, and I'm also significantly less flexible. The only real advantage I would let stand is the certainty that the money will remain untouched in the event of unemployment and the like. This can be a really important advantage for parts of the population with an increased risk of unemployment and/or a lack of discipline when it comes to separating the consumption budget from the contents of the deposit. For my part, however, I prefer to rely on flexibility and personal responsibility.
•
88
•
@PassiveAggressive Hi Chris, thank you very much for your opinion. I recommend a combination of private deposit and pension insurance anyway. So you can make the best use of the advantages in the investment form. After all, you don't just buy one share :) Fortunately, the structures are no longer that strong with this product. The assets can be flexibly restructured during the term. If the going gets tough, the contract can also be terminated at the end of the month, but depending on age and term, capital gains tax + Soli may be due. Especially for people who have neither the leisure nor the necessary knowledge (or the incentive to acquire this), I find the pension insurance compared to other options (such as savings book) very good. The prerequisite, of course, is always sound advice. Unfortunately, many contracts are absolute crap.
•
11
•