Social Security Coordination Research Articles

Correction: The binding nature of posting PDA1 issued under EU social security Coordination Regulations and the possible role of national courts

Correction: The binding nature of posting PDA1 issued under EU social security Coordination Regulations and the possible role of national courts

EHDS and Free Movement of Patients: What EU Intervention is Needed?

The European Commission issued a proposal for a Regulation on the European Health and Data Space to improve patient mobility. This EHDS Regulation lays down rules for the exchange of digital health data for primary use (treatment) and for secondary use (i.e. research, policymaking). This proposal has far-reaching implications for national healthcare systems. The question arises whether, with this draft, the Commission in fact proposes to overstep the powers of the European Union, as the delivery and organization of healthcare belongs to the competences of the Member States. Furthermore, the (lack of) exchange of digital health data is not the only hinderance for the free movement of patients. The current set-up of the Patient Directive and the Social Security Coordination Regulation also discourages patients from seeking treatment abroad. Therefore, a more integrated approach in the form of a new Patient Regulation is, in our view, needed.

Cross-border workers - navigating the challenges of social security coordination rules in the era of telework in the European Union

In 1 2020, there were 1.7 million cross-border workers in the European Union, creating difficulties in determining the applicable legislation for social security matters. The reason for this complexity is that even in cross-border activities, the legislation of only one Member State is applicable according to the Coordination Regulation 883/2004. This article examines the evolving landscape of social security coordination in the European Union. It explores the interplay between the European principle of free movement of workers and the complexities arising from various national social security systems, combined with the increase in telework. The article outlines the foundational legal frameworks underpinning social security within the European Union, including the Coordination Regulation EC 883/2004, and discusses primarily the challenges in applying these rules to cross-border teleworkers. It further analyses the implications of the new Multilateral Framework Agreement, providing a nuanced understanding of its role in offering simplified procedures and legal certainty for habitual cross-border teleworkers. The article also highlights the Agreement's limitations, including its restricted scope and the persisting administrative burdens. The discussion extends to the broader context of ongoing legislative efforts and the need for more flexible and modern social security coordination rules in the European Union. The article aims to shed light on the critical issues surrounding social security coordination in an era of evolving work practices.

Regulatory cooperation, social security coordination, and participation in Union Programmes

Regulatory cooperation, social security coordination, and participation in Union Programmes

Modernisation efforts in EU Social Security coordination

EU social security coordination aims to ensure the free movement of persons. In doing so, within the limits of its powers, the European Union ensures that EU citizens retain their social security entitlements in the territory of all Member States by laying down rules at the level of regulations. However, today there are many changes that require the revision of the various EU legal standards and the modernisation of their practical implementation. Thus, in the area of social security coordination, too, three key measures have been taken in response to digitalisation and increasing labour mobility, which not only contribute to the mobility of EU citizens but also serve to strengthen cooperation between Member States. Within the framework of this study, besides presenting the theoretical background and regulatory rules of social security coordination, the above mentioned modernisation measures will be reviewed

Commission

This overview highlights the Commission’s (i) proposal for rules to facilitate the activities of cross-border associations in the European Union, (ii) proposal for steps to digitalize social security coordination, (iii) launching of BEFIT proposal and (iv) launching of Head Office Tax system for SMEs proposal.

Reflection on Telework in Social Security Coordination

Telework has become prevalent during the COVID-19 pandemic, which has changed the way we look at work. However, the current EU rules for social security coordination were not designed to accommodate telework, with the lex loci laboris principle being understood in practical terms. During the pandemic, the European Commission initially suspended the coordination regulation rules to prevent sudden changes for workers, which caused unintended consequences and potential discrimination against intra-community migrants. To address these issues, options include changing the legal text of the coordination regulation, reinterpreting coordination rules, or concluding bilateral or multilateral agreements. Failure to take action could lead to continued discrimination by companies. In this regard, if no legislative action is taken, at least a common approach within the context of the Administrative Commission should be envisaged to ensure uniformity at the European level. The recent developments within the context of the Administrative Commission at least seem to go in that direction.

Basic Principles of European Social Security Coordination based on Regulation (EC) 883/2004

This article discusses the importance of free movement and the coordinating social law of the European Union (EU) inensuring that people who move between EU Member States are not left without social security coverage. The articleexplains that the EU does not have a uniform or common social law and that the responsibility for social policy primar-ily lies with the Member States. The coordinating social law of the EU is limited to the coordination of the various socialsecurity systems of the Member States. The article further explains that the coordination of social security systems isessential for the success of European integration and emphasises that the EU Member States are bound by both thebasic Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 and the implementing Regulation (EC) No 987/2009. After a primary law derivationof the social law coordination, the article explains the scope of application and the key principles of Regulation (EC)883/2004. This is followed by a discussion of the Regulation’s conflict-of-law rules, which take precedence over nationalprovisions.

系统仿真视角下平顶山市城市社区养老托育服务供给研究

With the increasing trend of aging and fewer children in society, China’s population structure is facing severe challenges. After the official implementation of the “Three Child Policy” in 2021, Pingdingshan City is facing the problems of how to provide effective community services, meet the needs of the elderly and children, and promote harmonious community development. In September 2022, Pingdingshan City formulated a comprehensive solution titled “one old and one little” to carry out supply side structural reform. The main content is to establish a bottom line through social security coordination, promote universal benefits, by mobilizing various forces from the government, market, and society to achieve a market-oriented coordinated development path. It has continuously made new progress in providing for the elderly and children. This article revolves around three dimensions: the supply and demand of urban community elderly care services, the factors that affect urban community elderly care, and policy suggestions. By studying literature and organizing data, a simulation model is established. Through model analysis, the influencing factors of the functional performance of the urban community elderly care service system are ultimately identified, and countermeasures and suggestions for improving the urban community elderly care service system are proposed. I hope it could ensure the supply and demand of future elderly care services, and find a balance between economic development and social security.

The binding nature of posting PDA1 issued under EU social security Coordination Regulations and the possible role of national courts

The EU social security Coordination Regulations envisage a special conflict rule that, under strict conditions, allows posted workers to maintain temporarily the social security insurance of the home Member State. The Portable Document A1 (PDA1), the proof of insurance, is a binding document for the institutions and courts of the host Member State that can only be invalidated or withdrawn by the institutions that issued it or by the corresponding national courts. The case-law of the European Court of Justice has clarified that under certain very specific circumstances a fraudulent foreign PDA1 can be disregarded by a Court, but never invalidated. Communication and collaboration between institutions of the issuing and receiving Member States and the judicial procedures for challenging a foreign PDA1 may need to be enhanced and improved, but the current rules of play respond to the logic of the Coordination Regulations, to sincere cooperation, to legal certainty, and to the uniqueness of the applicable law and the competent jurisdiction. The scarce available data shows that only a few of the three million PDA1s issued each year are being challenged. Given that the main role of the EU legislation is to protect workers, it does not seem logical to change the social security framework of posting, although it can be improved. Mutual trust must be restored.

Free movement and access to social security in the EU: The challenge of exporting unemployment benefits

The freedom of movement of EU workers and access to national welfare state systems has become a controversial topic among policymakers in recent years. To understand this, the article analyses the positions of Western European states towards the proposal of the European Commission to reform the European social security coordination. The structural problems of this reform and the current Regulation (EC) 883/2004 can be seen in the discussion on the export of unemployment benefits. Although Western European states have similar insurance-based and comprehensive unemployment systems, they have conflicting views on this issue. The article presents a comparative case study of Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany. Data was generated via expert interviews and policy documents and analysed through institutionalist approaches. By tracing the debates on the export of unemployment benefits, the article makes a more general argument about the debate on the free movement of workers and social security in the EU. It explains that policymakers’ main concern is not only the financial burden on their welfare systems, but also that the current Regulation (EC) 883/2004 and the reform proposal are incompatible with national monitoring and enforcement systems, which are designed to work best when the worker is in the Member State of last employment. This incompatibility of the coordination rules with national rules creates opposition among policymakers to the access of EU workers to national welfare systems.

Practical Applications of How Social Security Coordination Can Add Value to a Tax-Efficient Withdrawal Strategy

The spike in marginal tax rates associated with the taxation of up to 85% of an individual’s Social Security benefit is termed the “tax torpedo.” In <b><i>How Social Security Coordination Can Add Value to a Tax-Efficient Withdrawal Strategy</i></b>, from the Fall 2021 issue of <b><i>The Journal of Retirement,</i></b><b>William Reichenstein</b> and <b>William Meyer,</b> principals at <b>Social Security Solutions</b>, <b>Inc.</b>, demonstrate how marginal tax rates can spike when a retiree collects both Social Security benefits and income drawn from tax-deferred accounts in the same year. The authors use a series of case studies to model how financial advisors can identify optimal tax-efficient strategies for clients who are able to delay the start of Social Security benefits. In the early years of retirement, income is drawn from tax-deferred accounts, and additional tax-deferred funds are converted to Roth accounts. When Social Security benefits later begin, the Roth accounts can be drawn upon tax-free as needed. This strategy can add significant value to portfolios by reducing income taxes and Medicare premiums.

The Application of the Conflict Rules of the European Social Security Coordination to Telework During and After the COVID-19 Pandemic.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the normal use of European conflict rules determining the applicable social security legislation was temporarily suspended to avoid changes in the applicable legislation as a result of telework, which was being obliged or recommended. The purpose was to avoid the consequences of such a change. However, these forms of remote work are expected to remain in existence after the pandemic, even when the suspension of the conflict rules is no longer in place. So, the question arises whether the suspension of the strict application of the conflict rules should be prolonged after the pandemic, or whether these conflict rules should be applied differently or even amended. First, this article discusses the measures that were taken during the pandemic. Next, it will highlight the consequences if the temporary measures are not prolonged after the pandemic for the determination of the applicable social security legislation. It will explore the possible re-interpretation of or even amendments to these rules in order to adapt them to the continuation of telework.

Bringing society back into our understanding of European cross-border care

We are pleased to discuss our study on the European Health Insurance Card (EHIC) and the redistributive effects of EHIC-related east–west patient and payment flows across regions and social classes. Our critics confirm our key finding: EHIC patient outflows from Eastern European (EE) to Western European (WE) countries result in a much higher relative burden for the budgets of EE states than outflows from WE to EE do for WE countries. Starting from what they see as the true mission of social security coordination, however, they also tell us that we should never have studied the redistributive impact of EHIC patient and payment flows in the first place. In this response, we therefore explicate the differences between our empirical sociological perspective and our critics’ normative legal approach. This is important, especially when social facts contradict normative legal assumptions as in our case. The EU laws that govern EHIC patient and payment flows are indeed based on the free movement provisions of the EU’s internal market project, but our empirical findings show that the promise of ‘economic, social and territorial cohesion, and solidarity among Member States’ contained in Article 3.3 of the Treaty of the European Union is not realized in practice in the case of east–west EHIC payment flows and patient mobility.

How Social Security Coordination Can Add Value to a Tax-Efficient Withdrawal Strategy

This study describes a tax-efficient withdrawal strategy that can add substantial value to many clients of financial advisors with financial portfolios worth up to $2 million. In early retirement years, these households can delay the start of their Social Security benefits and make Roth conversions to fill relatively low tax brackets, which are generally also their marginal tax rates. Once Social Security benefits begin, they can make tax-free Roth withdrawals to minimize the amount of tax-deferred account (e.g., 401(k)) withdrawals that are taxed at 185% of their tax bracket, due to the taxation of Social Security benefits. With a series of cases, we show that a financial advisor can add substantial value to many of their clients’ financial portfolios by recommending such a withdrawal strategy. <b>Key Findings</b> • Due to the taxation of Social Security benefits, there is a wide range of income where a household will have a marginal tax rate of 150% or 185% of their tax bracket, where marginal tax rate denotes the additional taxes paid on the next dollar of income. • This study presents a general tax-efficient withdrawal strategy that will help many singles and married couples with financial portfolios worth up to $2 million substantially reduce the present value of their lifetime income taxes. In addition, these withdrawal strategies can greatly reduce the percentage of these households’ lifetime Social Security benefits that will be taxable. • In the general tax-efficient withdrawal strategies, in early retirement years, these households should delay the start of their Social Security benefits and make Roth conversions to fill relatively low tax brackets, which are generally also their marginal tax rates. Once Social Security benefits begin, they can make tax-free Roth withdrawals to minimize the amount of tax-deferred account (e.g., 401(k)) withdrawals that are taxed at 185% of their tax bracket, due to the taxation of Social Security benefits.

Key Ideas on Mobility and Social Security after Brexit

This article provides a general understanding of the main aspects of mobility (no longer referred to as free movement) and social security coordination, in the Brexit international agreements that govern the relationship of the EU with the United Kingdom: the Withdrawal Agreement (WA) and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA). The article shows that both topics, mobility (or migration) and social security coordination, were relevant to the origins of Brexit. Before analysing both Brexit Agreements, the article gives a comparative overview of them, considering their principal features and their relationship. The article then analyses the mobility and coordination of social security in each agreement from a practical perspective, giving examples and highlighting the significant differences in coverage that they generate for the different citizens included in their personal scope.

Renegotiating the European Union’s free movement and social security coordination policies: Britain’s approaches and interests

The EU’s freedom of movement has increasingly been brought into question in the last few years as member states have restricted social benefits for EU migrants. Britain proposed in-work benefit restrictions for economically active EU migrants in intergovernmental negotiations leading up to the referendum on its membership to the EU. Access to social benefits is an important component of free movement. It provides EU citizens with social rights in host member states, which promotes internal migration. Restricting free movement threatens European integration because it is a fundamental EU treaty right. This article analyses Britain’s preferences towards the EU’s free movement and social security coordination policies leading up to the Brexit referendum. Britain’s identity, and conceptions of statehood and European.

LOS DOS ACUERDOS DE ALEMANIA CON MARRUECOS SOBRE SEGURIDAD SOCIAL Y PRESTACIONES POR HIJO

This paper analyses the two agreements in force on social security coordination between Germany and Morocco: the Agreement on Social Security from 25 March 1981 (quoted as “SSA Morocco”), and the Agreement on Child Benefits also from 25 March 1981 in the form of the Supplementary Agreement of 22 November 1991 (quoted as “CBA Morocco”).

The role and limits of European social security coordination in guaranteeing migrants social benefits

This article examines whether the EU social security coordination Regulations 883/2004 and 987/2009 contribute or fail to contribute to the EU policy objective of guaranteeing adequate social protection and fighting against poverty as set by Article 9 TFEU. Even if this coordination system does not directly interfere with the social protection systems of the Member States, it plays an important role in preventing persons who use the right to free movement within the EU from ending up in a situation in which they would lose entitlement to social benefits because of their migration. In analysing this issue I will concentrate on the role of the underlying general principles of this coordination, more specifically, on the rules for the determination of the applicable legislation, the principle of equal treatment, the export of benefits and the aggregation of periods. I will also elaborate on a number of examples where this coordination system fails to prevent the loss of entitlement to social benefits, such as the position of workers in non-standard forms of work, the limited rights of economically inactive migrants, the recent introduction of waiting periods for newcomers, and situations in which the migrants risk falling between two stools. I will conclude with the notion of fairness.

Sincere Cooperation, Mutual Trust, and Mutual Recognition in Social Security Coordination

This article looks into the meaning of the concepts of sincere cooperation, mutual trust, and mutual recognition in EU social security coordination. It analyses the legislative choice of coordination as the main regulatory mechanism in the field, and examines the role of administrative cooperation. Furthermore, the article highlights the challenges that arise in situations where mutual recognition is required under the Regulations, as in connection with portable documents relating to the posting of workers. It also considers the limits to mutual trust via the principle of prohibition of fraud and abuse of rights established in the case law of the CJEU on free movement. In the last few years, this principle has been extended into the field of social security law, notably in Altun. In this way, the coordination regime does not require totally blind trust: rather, it balances the Member States' interests of maintaining the integrity of their social security systems with the Union interest of simplifying free movement. As in other fields of EU law relating to free movement, the mutual trust between the Member States in social security coordination may therefore be set aside in extraordinary cases.