Rob

Looks like a very patchy picture, with the European Commission perhaps beginning to lose patience? http://www.french-property.com/news/french_health/early_retirees_cmu_carte_de_sejour/

Probably the worst and most frequent form of rudeness I have encountered in France are those who come to live here in the expectation that the French should be able to speak English, and who make little attempt to learn the language! I know many do make the effort, but we are let down by a large minority who do not.  

It is not often I disagree with Will, but on this occasion I do think it this new scheme is precisely the type of thing that is going to be useful to someone with a low turnover, as the contributions are based on turnover, not profit. IFP stated in a recent review of the scheme, that you need to do the arithmetic, and I certainly think that is true. http://www.french-property.com/guides/france/working-in-france/starting-a-business/social-security/contribution-levels/micro-entreprise/ The beauty of the whole new micro/auto basis of being charged is surely that it gets you  into the health system at a reasonable cost and not much hassle for someone doing something on a part-time basis.

I agree. The use of an accountant is extremely important. But I have received poor advice from accountants, as have others I know. Surely the real answer is that you need to use multiple sources of information. I find official French Government sites rarely give a complete picture, and often assume a lot of prior knowledge. Moreover, they are rarely written from the perspective of an expat. Secondary Anglophone sources are prone to error, but as they are in English, they are often a good starting point. Some of the best of those sources include Forums, such as those we enjoy here:)

Whilst I can see there must be concern at the possibility that withdrawl of an E121 might risk the loss of health cover in France, the new law makes provision for those who cannot get private health cover to affiliate to the CMU. Accordingly, if you lose entitlement to an E121 because you no longer qualify on medical grounds, you should (theoretically) be able to obtain private health insurance. If your application for private insurance is refused (or you find it impossible to pay the premium demanded), then you can make application to join the CMU. These health changes are not good news for expats, but let us keep them in proportion, and not try and invent problems or exaggerate those that exist. 

Whilst I can understand the campaign feels the priority should be to secure relief for those already resident in France, by failing to set our grievances within a wider context we are in danger of accepting the legitimacy of the changes.   Judging by the reaction of the French and UK citizens alike, we certainly seem to have lost the public relations battle on this issue.   The fact is that the private insurance industry in France is completely ill equipped to take on the task of providing health insurance for expats.   Whilst there are a few companies who offer short term insurance until their clients can gain access to the CMU, there is no company that is offering a decent, competitive long-term private insurance policy.   They do not do so because there is simply no proper legal, fiscal, or social basis for private health insurance in France.   Even if we are to accept (which I do not) the legitimacy of this law, why has the ‘campaign’ not stated to the French Government that its implementation should be set aside until there is a private insurance industry in France capable of taking on the responsibility?   Surely we should have been arguing that if the French Government are going to change the rules of the game, then they also have a responsibility to ensure there is proper alternative provision?  Tactically, this would have been a strong, morally defensible position.   If the Government could have been persuaded that the mutuelles, in particular, should be granted the clear right and incentive to offer ‘private’ health policies this whole crisis could have been averted.

The drift of the campaign against this new law is deeply worrying, as those on E106s, and those yet to relocate to France, appear to have been abandoned.   See, for instance, the FHI open letter to the French Minister of Health, which effectively concludes by saying that the lifeboats are full of existing CMU affiliates, and that no-one else can be accommodated.   What nonsense it is that we should now effectively cease campaigning against this law, for fear that we might lose the concessions that appear to have thus far been granted!   The reason why the French Government have delayed publication of the new circular is that they know they are in a legal and political minefield.   However, if the Government does anything that hardens this legislation, they are also likely to find themselves in front of tribunals the length and breadth of the country, as well as the European Court. The basic law is discriminatory and fundamentally flawed.   It is not FHI who are between a rock and a hard place, but the French Government.   Surely at this point we should seeking, not to rein in our aspirations, but to continue to put so many torpedoes into the side of this ship, that she is unable to stay afloat?   A strategy of seeking maximum concessions and exemptions to the basic law based on residence, contribution, pre-existing medical conditions, future serious medical condition, temporary employment, divorce and other exception circumstances, needs to be at the root of the campaign.   Instead of going off on a tangent, and campaigning for those in the CMU at the end of Sept 07, we should be pressing for immediate release of the circular, because it probably contains so many opportunities in it for expats to gain entry into the French health system that the basic legislation would cease to worth the paper it was written on.  CNAM do not like it precisely because it is unworkable. Great for us!  

[quote user="BJSLIV"]  Unless the whole of the EU faces up to its own stated ideals of free movement But in reality the EU has no real interest in the free movement of Inactives, the real interest is the movement of workers which can  keep down wage inflation in those countries which have a shortage of labour. [/quote] I wonder if BJSLIV does not have a point. IFP have made a similar point on their site this morning, vis: Now is the time for those of you campaiging against this law to write to the French Government to try and blunt the impact of the law with evidence of the type of cases that should be allowed to pass through the gates. In particular, the campaign needs to expose their naive belief in the ability of the private insurance industry to be able to offer cover to those with a pre-existing medical condition or disability. Efforts to try and persuade the EU to do something are likely to be futile. http://forums.french-property.com/public-services-f10/rule-changes-on-health-cover-t1062-10.html?sid=0d76f7b4de3245445245cf3ef6e61f47  

But surely as a UK national I can still get access to UK health service?

I see on IFP this morning that French and EU officials are saying that the private health insurance policy will also need to cover travel, as we will not be entitled to a European Health Insurance Card: http://forums.french-property.com/public-services-f10/rule-changes-on-health-cover-t1062-10.html?sid=96f0756ad3dc733315a338a58e7417d3#p4239

I have just received a regular newsletter I get and it does seem that even the CPAMs do not know what is going on, although the majority seem to be saying that existing residents will be able to stay in the CMU. http://www.french-property.com/newsletter/2007/9/3/ What the hell is the AME?