Short answer: An American married to a Swiss citizen has a legal right to a Swiss residence permit (B) if the couple lives together (AIG art. 42(1)), and in 2026 there is no income or savings figure to meet: not for a single sponsor, not for a couple, not per child. The money test applies only when the sponsor is a foreign resident (art. 43 for a C-permit holder, art. 44 for a B-permit holder), where the family must not need social assistance or supplementary benefits, judged at least against the SKOS guidelines and set by each canton. So a Swiss sponsor does not need an annuity to qualify; where a lifetime annuity still earns its place is the cantonal wealth tax, because annuity insurance with no surrender value is not subject to it.
Income rules and taxes by country: Norway, Switzerland, Sweden, Italy, Spain, Malta and more, plus how a lifetime annuity fits.
If your spouse is Swiss and you have spent decades together in the US, the Swiss rule is the friendliest in this series. Norway, the Netherlands and the UK all make the citizen spouse prove income in his or her own name. Switzerland does not. Here is what the Foreign Nationals and Integration Act (AIG) actually says in its 2026 text, where money can still matter, and an honest view of whether you need an annuity at all.
Art. 42(1) reads: “Foreign spouses and unmarried children under 18 of Swiss citizens have a right to the grant and extension of the residence permit if they live with them.” Living together is the condition. Art. 42 contains no means test, no housing test, no rule about social assistance or supplementary benefits, and no language condition for the B permit.
| Item | Spouse of a Swiss citizen (art. 42) |
|---|---|
| Type of claim | A legal right (Anspruch) to the B permit and its extension |
| Condition | You live together |
| Income or savings figure | None |
| Language for the B permit | None. The course-registration rule (art. 43(2), 44(2)) and the A1 oral rule for extensions (VZAE art. 73a) are written for spouses of permit holders, not of Swiss citizens |
| Permanent residence (C) | After 5 years of living together, if the integration criteria of art. 58a are met (art. 42(3)); VZAE art. 73b asks for spoken A2 and written A1 in a national language |
| Deadline | Apply within 5 years; for spouses of Swiss the clock starts when the Swiss spouse enters Switzerland or when the marriage begins (art. 47(1) and (3)(a)) |
| Where the right ends | Abuse of rights (sham marriage) or a revocation ground under art. 63 (art. 51(1)) |
The art. 47 timing matters for long-married couples: because the clock starts when the Swiss spouse moves back, a couple married for 30 years in the US is not out of time. The rule for Swiss citizens coming back with a spouse from an EU or EFTA country has extra free-movement wrinkles; coming from the US, plain art. 42(1) applies, and it is the easier route anyway.
One place. Through art. 51(1)(b), the revocation grounds of art. 63 apply, and art. 63(1)(c) covers a person who is “permanently and to a considerable extent dependent on social assistance”. That is a high bar, higher than the plain “dependent on social assistance” test used for spouses of foreign residents, and every revocation gets a proportionality review. SEM’s directives also say that a person who stops drawing social assistance because he or she now receives an old-age pension with supplementary benefits must not lose the permit on that ground. In practice: Switzerland is expensive and health insurance is mandatory, so you want reliable income to live on, but you do not need to prove a figure to get in.
The picture changes when the sponsor is not Swiss but lives in Switzerland on a permit. This applies, for example, to an American with a Swiss C permit bringing an American spouse.
| Condition | Spouse of a C-permit holder (art. 43) | Spouse of a B-permit holder (art. 44) |
|---|---|---|
| Type of claim | A legal right | Discretionary (“may be granted”) |
| Live together | Yes | Yes |
| Housing suited to the family | Yes | Yes |
| Not dependent on social assistance | Yes | Yes |
| No annual supplementary benefits (Ergänzungsleistungen), now or because of the reunification | Yes | Yes |
| Language | Registration for a course leading to at least A1 is enough at first; spoken A1 to extend (VZAE art. 73a) | Same |
| Whose income counts | All family members’ financial means, if proven and likely to last | The sponsor’s; future income of the incoming spouse only exceptionally |
There is no federal franc figure. SEM’s directives say the family should have at least the means set by the SKOS guidelines (the Swiss Conference for Social Welfare), and that cantons may require more. The SKOS basic-needs amount for a one-person household is CHF 1,061 a month (recommended from 1 January 2025), but it leaves out rent and health insurance, so every canton’s working threshold is higher and different. I have not seen a published couple figure I can rely on; ask the cantonal migration office for yours.
Why I write about this. My mom is Norwegian, my dad is American, and they’re planning the move from the US to Norway. My mom is the sponsor (the host, or “reference person” in UDI’s words), so Norway’s income test falls on her income, not my dad’s. UDI told us in writing that money in an account does not count as income, and only lifelong income does. Their savings were not the problem; the paperwork wanted a monthly number in the host’s name. The rules in Switzerland are different, but the problem is the same one many retirees hit: the income test, not the net worth. I’m writing this to help others in the same boat as my parents. Read how we worked through the Norway income requirement.
See roughly what a lifetime annuity would cost to close your income gap, then get my personal read by email. I can help while you still live in the US.
Estimates use the September 9, 2026 ImmediateAnnuities.com payout survey (life only) and a 15% cushion. Illustrative, not a quote.
| Household | 2026 requirement | Who must have it |
|---|---|---|
| Swiss sponsor plus American spouse (art. 42) | No figure | Nobody; only cohabitation is tested |
| Each child under 18 of a Swiss citizen | No figure | Nobody |
| Foreign C-permit sponsor plus spouse (art. 43) | No social assistance or supplementary benefits; SKOS as the floor (CHF 1,061 a month basic need for one person, before rent and health insurance), canton may ask more | The family, all members’ proven means |
| Foreign B-permit sponsor plus spouse (art. 44) | Same, and the permit is discretionary | The sponsor |
| Single American, no Swiss link, 55+ | Means above the supplementary-benefits level, set by the canton | The applicant (see the Swiss retiree permit page) |
For a Swiss sponsor, no. Art. 42 has no income test, so buying an annuity to “show income” is unnecessary, and I would rather say that plainly. The “sponsor is not the breadwinner” problem that trips couples up in Norway and the Netherlands, where the savings, 401(k)s and Social Security sit in the American spouse’s name, does not block the Swiss permit.
An annuity can still be worth a look for two other reasons:
If the sponsor is a foreign resident, the annuity also does its usual job: it gives the household proven, lasting means for the art. 43 or 44 test.
Yes, in every canton. Federal harmonization law (StHG arts. 13 and 14) taxes total net wealth at market value, and a married couple is assessed together (StHG art. 3(3)). Life and annuity insurance is valued at its surrender value. Per the Federal Tax Administration’s overview (law as of 1 January 2026), non-surrenderable capital and annuity insurance is not subject to wealth tax, though the payments may be taxed as income. Whether your contract has a surrender value decides the question, so get the insurer to confirm it in writing and ask the canton. The full comparison is on the Switzerland wealth tax and retiree permit page.
For the permit the answer is $0: there is no bar to fill. For wealth tax, suppose the couple decides to convert $500,000 of a portfolio into a life-only annuity owned by and paying one spouse, aged 62. Payout at 62 (ImmediateAnnuities.com survey of September 9, 2026, life-only, per $100,000 a month): man $603 average ($660 best), woman $582 ($637 best). Illustrative, not a quote.
| Annuitant, 62 | Premium | Income at average rate | Income at best rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Man | $500,000 | about $3,015 a month | about $3,300 a month |
| Woman | $500,000 | about $2,910 a month | about $3,185 a month |
If the canton confirms there is no surrender value, that $500,000 leaves the wealth-tax base; at a combined rate of 0.5% that is about $2,500 a year, and the lifetime income replaces portfolio withdrawals. A joint and survivor annuity covering both spouses pays less per dollar than single life, so get a quote. Social Security can start at 62 and is a separate income stream.
For the wealth-tax point, what matters is no surrender value: a life-only SPIA or joint and survivor SPIA, or an existing deferred annuity or MYGA converted to lifetime payments. Period-certain annuities, income riders where an account value can still be cashed out, and annuities still accumulating are valued at surrender value and stay in the base. For a foreign-resident sponsor’s means test, SEM looks at proven, lasting means, and lifetime income is the clearest proof.
US side. As a US citizen you stay taxable on worldwide income wherever you live. A US single premium immediate annuity bought with after-tax savings is taxed under IRC 72: an exclusion ratio makes part of each payment a non-taxable return of your premium until the premium is recovered. If you bought it with IRA money, every payment is taxable. The foreign earned income exclusion does not cover annuities (IRC 911(b)(1)(B)(i)). Foreign tax on the payments can be credited on Form 1116, through the treaty’s relief article. Since January 1, 2026, a US citizen with a foreign residence address cannot opt out of federal withholding, even if payments go to a US account (IRC 3405(e)(13), Treas. Reg. 31.3405(e)-1). Withholding is a prepayment, not extra tax. An annuity from a US insurer is not reported on FBAR or Form 8938, and it is not a PFIC.
Treaty. Under Article 18(2) of the 1996 US-Switzerland treaty, an annuity paid to a resident of Switzerland is taxable only in Switzerland. The saving clause (Article 1(2)) lets the US keep taxing its citizens anyway, and Article 23 relieves the double tax, with special rules in Article 23(3) for US citizens living in Switzerland.
Swiss side. Since 1 January 2025 only a yield share of each foreign life-annuity payment is taxed as income (DBG art. 22(3)(c)): the 10-year average yield on Swiss federal bonds plus 0.5 percentage points. The Federal Tax Administration published 7% for tax year 2025; the 2026 share is set after the year ends.
Net result. Switzerland taxes a small slice of each payment, the US taxes the non-excluded part, so the US tax is usually the binding one. Add the wealth-tax treatment of a contract with no surrender value, and the annuity is tax-friendly in Switzerland compared with drawing down a portfolio that is taxed as wealth every year.
The trade-offs, once: an annuity cannot be undone, payments are level unless you add a cost-of-living rider, they arrive in dollars while your costs are in francs, and payouts are lower at younger ages.
Free annuity gap analysis for Switzerland. Tell me your ages, your Social Security or pension, and whether you are single or a couple. I will show how far your income is from the Switzerland requirement and what a lifetime annuity would cost to fill the gap, in the sponsor’s or main applicant’s name where that matters.
Goldstein & Co. LLC dba Goldstein Insurance Services · Hans Goldstein, licensed insurance agent, CA lic. #4273294 · NPN 20602398 · 213-414-2808 · hans@hansgoldstein.com
Education, not tax, legal or immigration advice. Rules, thresholds and exchange rates change; confirm with the consulate or immigration authority and a local tax adviser before you act, and get answers in writing. Hans Goldstein is a licensed insurance agent (CA 4273294) and can only offer annuities to residents of states where he is licensed. Annuity payments are guaranteed by the issuing insurer’s claims-paying ability, not by any government. Payout figures are illustrations from a published survey, not quotes. Immediate annuities are generally irrevocable.