1. organising training and setting up networks on the
European Coordination of Social Security Schemes
in the 27 Member States
National trESS Seminar
European Co-ordination of social
security
Where do we stand – what problems
do we have?
Lund 14.10.2010
Bernhard Spiegel

2. Where do we stand? – Short inventory
•Around 1.5.2010
–What has been achieved? What is missing?
•Other developments
–Treaty of Lisbon
–Association Agreements
•Preview
–What are (could be) the next steps?
Bernhard Spiegel

3. 1.5.2010 – Entry into force of Reg. 883/2004
• Formalistic problems (survival of Reg. 1408/71):
– Reg. on Third Country Nationals
• Reg. 1408/71 for UK for eternity
– EEA-Agreement
– EU-Swiss Agreement
• Reg. 1408/71 for DK and UK for eternity - see later
• Other problems:
– Transition
• Concrete question: Procedures which began already before 1.5.
– Art. 87 (8) – applicable legislation
• „change of the relevant situation“
• E.g. new employer?
– Information for citizens
Bernhard Spiegel

4. Important achievements
– Implementing Reg. (Reg. 987/2009 + 1.
Amendment Reg. 988/2009)
– Important Decisions of the AC
• E.g. Decision No. A2 on posting
– „Portable“ Documents (all languages - fill able)
– Many paper SEDs
– Master Directory was available on 1.5.2010
• Recommendation: Test and test again!
• Strange results e.g. „Scheme for all“ (Code 23097)
Bernhard Spiegel

5. What is still open?
• Missing SEDs
– Disappointment because of missing communication
between Technique and Law (e.g. BF pensions)
• National adaptations for EESSI
– Reference Implementation necessary
• Additional national amendments to legislation (?)
– Is it allowed or necessary?
• E.g. concerning competences (previous Annexes to Reg. 574/72)
• E.g. concerning health care contributions from foreign pensions
(AT experience)
• Questions of interpretation not solved – see later
Bernhard Spiegel

6. Other related issues
• Entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty
– New voting (qualified majority – Art. 48 TFEU)
• Free movement of EU citizens (Art. 21 TFEU) –
Unanimity – irrelevant?
• AT and DE overruled TCN-Reg.
– Problems with TCN (Art 79 (2) TFEU)
• Association Agreements need for „intra community“
legal base – problems for DK/UK/IE
• EEA-Agreement (Art. 48 TFEU) and EU-Swiss Agreement
(Art. 79 (2) TFEU)?
Bernhard Spiegel

7. Open questions of interpretation - 1
• Value of insurance periods
• Periods for entitlement and/or calculation
• Differences due to national legislation!
• E.g. MS A entitlement: 15 Years; school periods only for
calculation
• MS B entitlement 30 Years; all periods (also school periods)
count for entitlement
• Results which are not justifiable
• Better solution: Assimilation of facts
• Borderline in grey zone: Taboo: periods of residence
disregarded under Bismarckian scheme
Bernhard Spiegel

8. Open questions of interpretation - 2
Family benefits:
• See also case study
• Calculation per child or per family?
• Could lead o different results
• One or two baskets?
• Family allowances and/or parental benefits?
• Period could be decided by beneficiary
• Shorter higher amount or longer lower amount
• Benefit with income replacement function
• Only with foreign income? Case C-257/10, Bergström
• Application of the Judgement in C-363/08, Slanina?
• Do all MS grant family benefits even in cases of divorced
couples where no alimony is paid?
• Repercussions in MS of residence of the children!
Bernhard Spiegel

9. Open questions of interpretation - 3
Reimbursement for unemployment benefits
No problem for insured persons
• But: dispute between institutions
• Amount to which entitlement would exist (with or
without aggregation?)
• 3 months of reimbursement also after very short
periods of employment?
Bernhard Spiegel

10. ECJ always dangerous
Many unresolved questions due to ECJ decisions
• No transposition in Reg. 883/2004
• Case C-205/05, Nemec – is this a common
principle of calculation?
• Case C-352/06, Bosmann – simultaneous
competence of 2 MS?
• Case C-211/08, Cion. against ES – No free
movement of services in case of urgent necessary
care
• Case C-208/07, Chamier-Glisczinski – relief for LTC
benefits? – no! Pending case C-388/09, da Silva
Martins
Bernhard Spiegel

11. Possible future steps?
Amendments to Reg. 883/2004:
• „Rectifications“ – getting rid of mistakes (e.g.
Art. 6 Reg. 987/2009)
• Changes concerning simultaneous activities?
• Intra group mobility (Report of trESS Think Tank)
• „hyper mobile“ Workers (e.g. persons engaged in
sport, musicians, artists)
• Transport workers
• aircrews
Bernhard Spiegel

12. Amendments to Reg. 883/2004 in the future
Special chapter for Long Term Care benefits?
• Is it already too late?
• No – ECJ accepted also amendments (no-export) for
non-contributory benefits
• But – what principles?
Activating measures
• Export + administrative aid?
• No Export if there are no such activating measures in
MS of residence?
Transposition of Patient mobility in Reg. 883/2004?
• Despite coming Directive?
Interference between Reg. 883/2004 and Dir. 2004/38
concerning residence of EU citizens (trESS Think Tank
Report)
Bernhard Spiegel

13. Future of EESSI
When will EESSI be operational?
• will MS be EESSI enabled before end of transition
period?
• Individual testing before „EESSI-enabled“?
Next steps:
• On-line Functionality
• eEHIC
• Data repository of EHICs which lost validity?
• „European Free Movement Card“
• Applicable legislation
• Data repository for A1 forms
• What happens now – Art. 16 procedures?
• Electronic Identification
• Speeding up of pension procedures
Bernhard Spiegel

14. Conclusion
• Incredible achievements
• But – a lot remains to be done
Thank you for your attention
Bernhard Spiegel