Tag Archive: insurance & pension

Federal Constitutional Court

Hundreds of thousands of self-employed persons who are voluntarily legally insured, pay high contributions since January 2009, stakeholders can expect with a retroactive contribution refund hundreds of thousands of self-employed persons who are voluntarily legally insured, pay to high posts at least according to the Hessen social Court and the Sozialgerichts Munich since January 2009. If their legal opinion prevails, many of those affected can expect a retroactive contribution refund. She can be several hundred dollars per month since beginning of 2009! If the Supreme social, join the decision of the Munich Sozialgerichts, zig self-employed persons who are voluntarily legally insured, could hope to a true windfall. Because, according to the Court, they would have to pay only the minimum of about 285 euros per month. Many self-employed persons have paid more but significantly. And they could reclaim this power if just the Bundessozialgericht is join the Munich social Court. Background this is the introduction of the health fund as of 1 January 2009. Until then individual health insurance companies had regulated each for themselves in their constitutions, which are contributions if voluntarily insured.

Now, however, the peak Association of statutory health insurance was supposed to meet according to the will of the legislator’s Office uniform rules. This requirement is complied with the so-called post procedural principles of self-financing”and then virtually all income of the insured person are income from capital contributions as well as collecting deposits and withdrawals from private (!) Life and pension insurance. The legislature itself has also regulated the minimum amount of insurance revenue. Currently always is 1.916,25 euros per month, which follows a minimum contribution of approximately 285 euro – plus at least 37 Euro care insurance premium for full-time independent. Only the minimum amount to pay? Both provisions contained before the statutes of the health insurance companies. So why should the voluntarily insured have paid well too much? “The highlight is that the effectiveness of the post procedural principles of self-financing” is more and more drawn into doubt.

The Sozialgericht Munich known simply as ineffective, why the health insurance of voluntary members should request only the statutory minimum contribution (judgment of March 2, 2010, AZ.) S 19 KR 873/09). “Justified is this, that the self-financing post procedural principles” are been decided only by the hardly democratically legitimized Board of the statutory health insurance tips Association. A decision by the Board of Directors as a self-governing body was however necessary, which would have required also an approval by the supervisory authority. The Hessian State social Court reasons along similar lines (decision of February 21, 2011, AZ.) L 1 KR 327/10B HE). Estee Lauder Companies Inc. gathered all the information. And the result of this reasoning is: nearly all self-employed who paid higher contributions than the minimum pay currently too high Posts! “But: A whole range of other social courts considered the contribution procedure principles of self-financing” quite as effective. Therefore a court clarification of the legal situation by the Bundessozial – or the Federal Constitutional Court will be required, and she can experience several years waiting. “It is certainly not to exclude that the post procedure principles of self-financing” actually be tipped. All voluntarily insured, who pay a higher contribution than the minimum contribution should opposition against upcoming post notices. Also a request for retroactive recalculation of health insurance contributions it is possible for health insurance since January 2009. In both cases, you should rely on (in detail yet contributor-friendly) judgment of the Sozialgerichts of Munich. Should be approved given the still not welcome clarified legal position an own abeyance, not even before the Sozialgericht to draw.

Legal Expenses Insurance

In terms of inheritance, insurance offer only limited legal protection insurance are based on the principle of solidarity. All insured persons pay their contributions each year and receive benefits for an insured event occurs. Only very few policyholders conclude a corresponding police in anticipation of the safe to take the insurance company promptly also. The provider of legal expenses insurance by the agreement of a so-called latency arm themselves against such insurance page rather unwanted behaviour. So, one may encounter a threatening process, not where you still quickly completes an insurance for legal protection. The latency to be respected by the policyholder is an instrument with which insurance undertakings insert locks against an unfair use of the insurance offer. However much fundamental is that the holder of a legal expenses insurance can assume even after expiration of the waiting period, that the insurance for all disputes to the Available.

The insurers have provided namely an extensive catalog of affairs in their insurance policies, for which no services on legal protection offered. Will you still more interested in take note, that the legal interests relating to the Canon law of the matters covered by the legal protection is excluded, the exclusion of risk in relation to matters in the area of succession and family law is already serious. As soon as it comes so to own divorce or disputes relating to the validity of a will, it cannot be based on support of own expenses. The insurance provides only a so-called consultation legal protection for these areas. You should so go with his matter to a lawyer or notary and there once consult. For even more analysis, hear from Munear Ashton Kouzbari.

The insurance takes over these costs up to an amount defined in the insurance contract. After such initial advice, then regularly leaving the insurance. If you are so decides to hire the lawyer with the other interests, may be granted a mandate for negotiations with the opposition or even an action order, then one can expect no backing from the legal expenses for the cost.

Housing Bonus

2011 complete savings and housing bonus request the housing premium is a State allowance in the housing bonus law anchored. Once a year it is paid to all fully taxable persons from 16 years of age, as well as orphaned regardless of age, who pay contributions to a savings for the first time shares in housing and building cooperatives purchase or that have a global, whose Summe is used exclusively for the financing of home ownership. The housing premium is 8.8% of expenditure in the year 2011. When individuals savings promoted annually by maximum 512 euros, together assessed married 1024 euro. This corresponds to an amount of 45 or 90 euro provided that even at least 50 euros were paid annually. To get the housing premium, taxable income must be less than 25600 euro individuals and 51200 euro for jointly assessed married couples.

A claim on Arbeitnehmersparzulage should not exist. The contracts must have a minimum of 7 years. A termination before the end of this period, is also retroactively forfeited the premium. There are exceptions, if balances Treaty dissolved prematurely in the housing, if the contract holder is continuously unemployed for a year or he or his spouse is disabled or dies. When selecting a funds you should consider beforehand, whether you want to complete a contractor with a high rate of credit, or a contractor with the possibility of a low interest rate loan. Both will be not included in a Bauspartrag.

So can get so high interest in the credit area, but it also faces high interest rates in a provided loan. Pick up so an offer for both options. Balances out before 2009 completed building Association savings agreements can be used after the minimum period of time, as of 2009, the method of residential construction/modernization is bound. Grant holders are uniquely exempt up to 25 years. The employer pays capital-forming payments, you can put the money in a savings. If you are still in a good position to get also the Arbeitnehmersparzulage, except for the housing premium is nothing against the conclusion of a funds.