SlideShare utilise les cookies pour améliorer les fonctionnalités et les performances, et également pour vous montrer des publicités pertinentes. Si vous continuez à naviguer sur ce site, vous acceptez l’utilisation de cookies. Consultez nos Conditions d’utilisation et notre Politique de confidentialité.
SlideShare utilise les cookies pour améliorer les fonctionnalités et les performances, et également pour vous montrer des publicités pertinentes. Si vous continuez à naviguer sur ce site, vous acceptez l’utilisation de cookies. Consultez notre Politique de confidentialité et nos Conditions d’utilisation pour en savoir plus.
trESS Analytical Study 2011Social security coverage of non-active persons moving to another Member State E. Eichenhofer H. Verschueren F. Van Overmeiren trESS Final Conference 2011, Ghent, 08/12/2011
Introductory Remarks• From trESS-CASSTM topic (2009) to highest political level (EPSCO Council June 2011)• Note from the Secretariat: first legal analysis• Notes from the Member States: several concerns• EC & Member States: need for further analysis• trESS Analytical Study, based on Questionnaire to “find facts” in the Member States
Content of the overall analysis• Overview of the legal framework• Mapping of residence based social security systems in the Member States• Fact-finding analysis (questionnaire)• Current state of EU law• Possible policy perspectives
Outcome of the fact-finding analysis• Uncertainty about the definition of “non-active persons”• Benefits involved: SNCB and residence based health care• Predominant issues: • fear for social tourism; • increase in claims from non-active persons; • unclear relationship between R-883/2004 and D-2004/38.• Lack of elaborated case studies, facts or statistics
Current state of EU law• Main priority question: “First legality of residence, then coordination (= entitlement to SNCB, health care)” or “first coordination rights, then legal residence (using coordination rights to establish legal residence)?”• Current texts of R-883/2004 and D-2004/38: no direct influence THUS separate and full application of both instruments• EU citizenship case law: Treaty-based equal treatment right and the “genuine link” justification
Current state of EU law• R-883/2004 notion of residence • Formally accepted: SNCB in MS of residence (balance to avoid exportation) + equal treatment for residence based health care in competent MS of residence (Art. 3 R-883/2004) • Substantially close to a “genuine link” assessment: a factual analysis of relevant individual circumstances (cf. Article 11 R- 987/2009) pointing to 1 Member State• Anyway too much room for different interpretations of the relationship: unsatisfactory situation
Possible future perspectives Route 1: “CLARIFICATION” • A safeguarding clause for R-883/2004 in D-2004/38 • A definition of social assistance in D-2004/38
Possible future perspectives Route 2: “RECONCILIATION” • A flexible waiting period in the residence concept of R- 883/2004 for the application of the special coordination regime for SNCB’s + limited export of SNCB • A cost compensation mechanism between the former and the new Member State of residence for residence based benefits granted to non-active persons
Possible future perspectives Route 3: “FOCUS ON RESIDENCE” • Substantiating residence notion of Article 1(j) R-883/2004 • An enhanced focus on the assessment of the establishment of residence in the Member States in order to prevent confusion and cases of fraud and abuse • The introduction of an “abuse of rights” clause with regard to the residence concept in Regulation 883/2004
Thank you for your attention! Questions? Filip.VanOvermeiren@UGent.be