Jump to content

Reunica.....


Lindnarden
 Share

Recommended Posts

J&D, the point is surely that this possible "cheat" is still only available for a year then you're back to square one? Thus I don't see it as being a cast iron solution to the healthcare problem and no, I don't resent it or regret anything we did to get healthcare for those who were already honestly established here.  At the height of the problems, it was pointed out that if we got together, we could get healthcare by paying one another via the cheque d'emploi system (and not actually carrying out any work - a scenario described above).  No system on earth has yet to be invented whereby the unscrupulous wouldn't find a way around it.

However, if the chancer who heretofore has worked on the black because a basic level of cotis would have left them virtually empty-handed, now has a way of joining the system, then, imo, this should be encouaged.  But I can see that for someone who is registered already in a different regime and who has struggled to meet the miniumum payments required then the Autoentrepreneur scheme could seem a bit annoying!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote user="cooperlola"]J&D, the point is surely that this possible "cheat" is still only available for a year then you're back to square one? Thus I don't see it as being a cast iron solution to the healthcare problem and no, I don't resent it or regret anything we did to get healthcare for those who were already honestly established here.  At the height of the problems, it was pointed out that if we got together, we could get healthcare by paying one another via the cheque d'emploi system (and not actually carrying out any work - a scenario described above).  No system on earth has yet to be invented whereby the unscrupulous wouldn't find a way around it.

However, if the chancer who heretofore has worked on the black because a basic level of cotis would have left them virtually empty-handed, now has a way of joining the system, then, imo, this should be encouaged.  But I can see that for someone who is registered already in a different regime and who has struggled to meet the miniumum payments required then the Autoentrepreneur scheme could seem a bit annoying!
[/quote]

Yep Debs, I remember very well the suggestions made at that time. It just seems bizarre that now it is very easy to register a business and get by with a small declaration of turnover and pay very little in charges and have health cover. I didn't mean to suggest that your sterling efforts were in vain. I wasn't even thinking of it being a solution to the health care problems, it just struck me as particularly strange how easy it is to do this now, given how difficult things were made for some at that time.

Am I making sense or just blabbering? doesn't matter.

If I understand it properly, under the AE scheme, even a very small turnover is still a turnover so presumably the health cover is maintained beyond the first year. Even if one declares a turnover of 100 Euros.

Hope you are getting better after all your traumas - nice to read your posts anyway!

Danny

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="cooperlola"][quote user="Debnfamily"]    Cooperlola, does that mean you think the waiting a year for cover idea is wrong?

[/quote]Sorry to be thick but I don't quite get the question![:$]

[/quote]In my post just before yours, I explained that the guy doing some work for me said he is under the AE scheme but he thinks he isn't covered for health cover for a year.  Someone else says you're covered for health under the AE scheme from the start of paying (any) cotisations.  On TF I asked the same question and someone just replied saying that under any scheme in France you have to earn a minimum of the equivalent of the SMI amount for 15 hours per week to be covered for health (though they don't say if this is every week for a year or what).  I'm just wondering exactly how this works because I'd be reluctant to give up E form cover to start a small business if it meant I wasn't covered for health in France because my earnings from the small business were too low - do you see what I mean? (and understand the question?!) This is presuming one has to give up any E form

coverage once one starts working under the AE scheme - so would you have to get private health insurance for a period until the cover

from the small business kicks in and if so, do you have to get it again

if your income drops below this threshold within your first five years

of residence during which you are supposed to be self sufficient, or

once you have been covered once by cotisations are you covered under the CMU scheme

somehow?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an anomaly with the autoentrepreneur scheme that I think will have to be closed, because it is unfair to those in salaried jobs and self-employment who pay a considerable amount for health care.

If you are salaried, you have to do a certain number of hours before you are eligible for health care. If self-employed, there are minimum levels of cotisations that have to be paid even if your turnover is minute or your business runs at a loss. Under AE, however, it seems possible to use this scheme to obtain health cover. It's my opinion, though others disagree, that AE was never intended as a of joining the French system; its purpose was to allow those already in the system and with social security cover, through employment, receipt of retirement pension or unemployment benefit, or students, to legally earn a bit of money on the side without having to fully register a business and pay full cotisations. It seems that once registered, you only have to make one declaration (no minimum amount specified) in a year to maintain your AE registration, and thus your health assurance.

Yes, I do understand the question. If you do any work in France your E106 for 'inactifs' automatically becomes invalid. How the AE scheme affects E121 is not clear - I would imagine it should be possible, but that, again, could be seen as unfair to E106 holders.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Will - by the way, it was cooperlola who I was asking if she understood the question, as she didn't understand it when I asked it the first time and so I had to clarify my gibberish!

So you seem to be confirming that it would take a year to get health cover then?  I'm not sure what you mean by 'one declaration' but I'm probably being really stupid so I'll go and read the leaflet about it.....

I would have thought if the E106 was affected then the E121 would be also, but if one of you had one of these forms and the spouse was covered as a dependent, wouldn't the fact that a dependent spouse worked under the AE scheme (or in fact any other scheme) mean that not only would that spouse have to become covered by cotisations but also the situation would switch around and the spouse with the E form would lose it and become a dependent on the person paying the cotisations by whatever method? 

If you consider it an anomaly which will have to be closed then other people probably will too, which means it might be a bit risky to go there - especially if you have a whole family whose health cover is in jeopardy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK - I read it and I'm back!  So to test if I've understood it correctly, here goes....

Under the first category I can sell something I've made, for instance, or rent a house (furnished - unfurnished also?) and pay 12% of the amount I sell my goods for, or 12% of the amount of rent I receive, which covers me immediately for pretty much everything (including health cover).  I can then, if my total family income does not exceed €25195 per family part, choose to either pay another 1% of either the amount I sold my goods for or my rent received as a flat rate of income tax, never to be revised, OR I can choose to have the profit (those amounts less a 71% allowance)  added to the rest of my family income and taxed.  The pay as you go option doesn't take any direct detailed account of any expenses such as cost of materials to make my goods or mortgage on a rental property.  The other option allows 71% of receipts as expenses.  So which option I choose for income tax would depend on my expenses.

The main thing is that it seems to be the case that I could be set up immediately and in the system and covered for health.

Have I understood the above correctly?

If so, what would happen if I later fell out of this regime, for whatever reason (say because of no declared turnover for a year) within 5 years of arriving in the country - what would then happen about my (and my family's) health cover?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is still early days for the AE scheme - it only began this year and the first declarations under the scheme, for those like Judie (Mrs Will) who registered right at the beginning, are not due to be paid until the end of this month - and it is still evolving so it is impossible to give definitive answers. All I can say is that your interpretation appears to be broadly correct in respect to the situation as it stands. However, in my opinion, being able to use the AE scheme, on which you can declare only very small sums and pay very low levels of cotisations, in order to enter the French system, is grossly unfair on those paying the usual high cotisations, and is inconsistent with the government's declared aim to get better value from, and more income for, the health service. The scheme was intended for those already in the system through employment, retirement (and why should a British person who is in the system through an E121 be prevented from earning a bit of money to supplement the state pension be treated any differently? - the standard E106 is, by definition, for economically inactive people so is treated separately) or similar means, and I don't think its proposers considered it as a possible alternative to private health cover for immigrants.

So I would be very surprised if the current lax regime lasts long; the problem is how to prevent people using the scheme for the sole purpose of joining the health system though a sham business activity, without losing sight of the AE's purpose, which is to make it easy to start a very small (usually but not exclusively spare-time) enterprise.

Under AE, like any of the micro regimes, you can forget expenses and allowances for taxation purposes. The standard abatement takes care of that. If your costs and expenses exceed these standard allowances you will probably be better off under the régime réel where you are not limited on turnover and can reclaim TVA.

The definitive answer to your final question is unknown, as nobody will have had the chance to do this yet. But the most likely outcome is that you would be expected to take out private health cover, like any other inactif without any alternative health assurance.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Linking to another thread, if you are doing  "property maintenance" work eg roof repairs,  don't you have to be insured which would nullify any cost savings from obtaining health care through the AE route? 

Its my understanding that a lot of builders do not do roof work as the insurance premiums are so high.  What would happen handyman Harry from Halifax fixing slates in the Charente falls off your roof?  Would you be liable for any injuries if he was not properly insured for such work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will, I'm not sure I understand your response.  I read the info, as best I could in French and then again in the PBSS translation, and I understood it to be a new way of starting up a small business, for anybody - whether as your sole activity or a sideline and whether you are a student, already employed, unemployed and wanting to start a new business or retired and wanting to have a sideline with a simple way of accounting for your income - without the usual high levels of paperwork and cotisations.  People paying 'grossly unfair....usual high cotisations' could transfer to the new scheme, as Judie has.  So what is the problem?

My concern is that I have a few small business ideas but I have a family whose health cover (and mine) is provided via my husband's E121.  I see what you are saying about British people not being treated any differently than French people but I don't know how a French person (or any other European) would be treated in this situation either.   I asked cooperlola because she seems to be an expert on this topic.   I am not entitled to an E121.  My husband is.  I, and our children, are covered as dependents on his E121.  I understand that this fact seems to offend some people but that is the way it is. 

If I started a small business under the AE scheme, I'm thinking that the fact that health cotisations are paid would mean that I would no longer be classed as a dependent on his E121.  If this is the case, our children might then be classed as my dependents rather than his and be covered along with me.  The cotisations paid in France might (normally do for other E form purposes, not just the E106, which covers you when you first move over, even looking for work, doesn't it?  not just if you come over and don't ever intend to work) take precedence over any E form - including the E121, where dependents are concerned.  Perhaps my husband would still have his E121 and only myself and the children would be affected, I don't know.  Perhaps he would be deemed to no longer need his E121 and be covered via my business activity.  Whichever, its something I need to be sure of before I do anything.  I can't just rush in.  At the same time, I don't want to be 'inactif' just because my husband is.  I don't want to be tied to being 'inactif' because of worries about what would happen if my small business didn't work out and I couldn't afford private health cover and had lost any right for me or my children to be dependents on my husband for health cover purposes or had even lost him his right to be covered via his E121.

I don't expect anything I've come up with so far to exceed the huge bands that the AE scheme covers, so its interesting that some people seem so hung up on this idea that this new scheme is only for people wanting to make pin money with a small sideline!

Ron Avery just made another post while I'm typing this one, so a quick response to that too:  I don't think the guy fixing my roof is in any way 'using' the AE system to gain health care.  Quite the contrary since his understanding is he isn't covered for a year!  That was my understanding (from him) and that was why I questioned it - that he had to pay for private health cover because he couldn't be covered under the AE scheme yet and couldn't be covered via an E121 (he is past UK retirement age; his son working with him isn't) because he is working and paying cotisations in France.  As to the insurance thing - I have no idea!  I have seen his siret form and understand he is legally working via the AE scheme and thought that was all I needed to know.  Are you telling me I should have asked to see his insurance documents before allowing him to work on my roof?  I've never asked to see such documents before (the French chimney sweep ran about up there too) either here or in England.  Is this a thing you need to worry about here in France, Ron?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deb I was only using "Harry from Halifax" as an example, not citing your bloke in particular, this was just an example to question if somebody using the AE scheme and not having to pay private health care premiums might not be any better off if they have to pay employment based insurances, which for work such as roofing can be very expensive.

Your situation needs expert advice and consideration, at the moment you are legally covered as a family under an E121 but if you are covered by an IB based E 121 that may well change as IB is replaced by the Employment Support Allowance. You should get advice from CPAM as to what your status would be regarding dependency should you work under an AE as that may complicate your situation considerably, but be careful as your possible situation of one parent under an E121 the other working is not a usual occurence in France and you might get conflicting answers.  I don't know anyone who is that situation but there might be someone on here who is and so can advise.

To answer your last point, whether in the UK or France, check both the registration/Siret and the insurance.  If someone you employ is not insured (and you knew that to be the case) and falls off your roof it might turn out to be you who pays for any medical treatment, assuming that he survives!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bit that is unfair, or it might be better to say inconsistent, about AE is precisely that, as things stand at present, you could start a so-called business which was declared under AE, do some 'jobs' for a friend and charge about 50€, pay 12€ or so in cotisations, and enjoy health cover in France. As long as you make one payment of cotisations a year it appears your health cover is maintained. Plus you could also stand to be eligible for some CAF, vieillesse and other benefits as a result.

Compare that with somebody starting a business under the previous regimes; I don't know what the minimum level of cotisations might be currently but when I had a French business it was about 1200€. For those who are in salaried employment, you have to do a certain number of hours before you become eligible for health cover - though you still pay cotisations - and you pay around 20% (and your employer about 40%) on your earnings. For those who are not in work, and not covered by E forms, they have to pay for private health assurance, which I understand is about 2000€ upwards. Even those able to join the system under residency qualifications pay 8% towards health cover. That's what I believe is wrong and which will have to be changed. I can't see Sarkozy and co scrapping the need for private health cover for those outside the system, or reducing cotisations for other regimes, so there will in my opinion be changes to AE. If anybody has a bona-fide business, is earning under the AE limits with no other income, and can afford to live, then good luck to you.

You can't compare Judie's AE business with somebody coming to France and using the scheme to avoid having to take out private health cover. She has been in the French system though being in salaried employment in France for seven years, and remains in employment - the AE business is in addition to that. I believe, and this is my belief rather than hard fact, that the scheme was introduced primarily for people like her. Not just for pin money, there was always the hope that the small businesses would grow beyond the AE limits and thus make a real contribution to the French economy and, ultimately, help out with the serious unemployment situation in France. If you read the statements issued by the minister responsible for introducing the scheme, Hervé Novelli, he seems to be of the same mind.

Regarding E121 etc, I think there is some confusion here too. I am not aware of anything that prevents you working in France with an E form. In fact there are several, like the E101, that are issued specifically to workers. I don't know of any rule that says if you have an E121 you cannot do a bit of paid work to supplement your pension (though I may be wrong, I often am). Regarding E106, however, there are two types of E106. There is the worker's E106, and the more common 'inactif' E106. By definition, if you work you lose entitlement to the standard E106. That would seem to preclude those with the inactif E106 from having an AE (or any other) business and enjoying the benefits of the E form cover at the same time, but this does not necessarily apply to those with other E forms. It is also consistent with the issue of the standard E106 to those seeking work in France, i.e. it gives cover until either they find a job, or the form expires.

I have little experience of insurance requirements for artisans, so will leave that to Ron and others who do know about them. Though I know that these insurances can be very expensive, making it unlikely that anybody with an artisan business within the AE turnover limits is going to afford the premiums as well as make a worthwhile living, and that the AE status does not absolve you from legal requirements regarding qualifications or insurance in regulated trades and professions.

Edit: Debnfamily - I would rather like to think that your roofer is right and you have to show a year of sensible trading/income levels before you get full cover under the AE scheme (for those who rely solely on the AE). However, reading certain other forums it seems that people are registering under the AE scheme, having previously been inactif, and are getting cartes vitales issued from the outset. This presumably means they have health cover - although I suppose it is always possible, though unlikely, that the cartes merely show that they are registered with a primary health assurer, not necessarily that they are eligible for reimbursements. However, as I said right at the beginning, it is comparatively early days and the AE scheme is still evolving so there are bound to be inconsistencies and changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 OK - the E106: I don't think there ARE two types at all.  You get the E106 if you have the necessary contributions in the country you are moving from and it covers you and your dependents for a limited amount of time.  If you've already been inactive in the country you left for a certain amount of time, you wouldn't get it, I believe.  However, if you have got recent enough contributions to get it and you move and then if you start work in the country you moved to it (the E106) stops and you. and your dependents, are then insured under that country.  If you don't start working, you have the E106 until it runs out and then have to sort out health cover - for yourself and your dependents. 

The E121 however, does have two different forms - the IB related one and the pension related one.  Dependents are covered on either of these but I believe that they are only covered if they are not covered in any way in the country of residence.  I thought the general rule of all the EC regulations was that you are only insured in one member state and if you are insured in your country of residence then that insurance takes priority.  Once one of the dependents on an E121 starts working and paying contributions in the new country of residence, that country becomes the country under which they are insured.  So I think that my children would have to be insured via me and not my husband because they could.  Since the E121 holder could then be considered as a dependent of the worker, wouldn't that mean that the worker's insurance in the country of residence would take priority and therefore th E121 would be superceded?

Even if this wasn't the case and my husband could keep his E121, what I'm also not sure of, even after re-reading the relevant leaflets and EC regulation 1408/71 (and the new 883/2004, which still isn't current because it's implementing regulation hasn't been ratified yet, as far as I can see), is whether if a new business under AE didn't work out, we (me and the children) would be covered in France because of the contributions paid by me, would go back to being dependents on my husband and covered for health under his E121, or have to get private health cover. 

The thing is, this rule about being self sufficient for five years - is this regardless of whether you have been employed and paid contributions that way or self employed and paid contributions that way?  In other words, if you are working in any form, are your contributions being paid to France for up to five years with no benefit to yourself or your family because under the 'self sufficient' rule, if you lost your job or business and became unemployed, you still could not claim any help in France because you had been living here for less than five years?  Or is this five year rule only relevant for non-active people?  Maybe I'm getting confused because a lot of the posts on the forum do seem to be aimed at non-active people and their situation.  Would you be covered for all benefits after working and paying contributions in the new country for a certain amount of time, regardless of the amount of time you have been resident, and the only thing not clear here is whether this minimum amount of time is either waived or hasn't been thought about or documented in connection with the new AE scheme?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah - just clicked about what you meant about the worker's E106 - you mention the E101 form, which is issued along with an E106 (the same E106) to people who are working temporarily (less than a year - which can exceptionally be extended to two years). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK - thanks Ron.  Trouble is, do I really want to ask to see his insurance now, half way through a job, if its only my problem if I KNOW he isn't insured????

Its a bit dangerous asking questions about this subject on here as people seem to assume that anyone wanting to use the new scheme is using it as a way of entering the health care system, rather than genuinely using it for what it is intended for.  Next, there will be messages telling people they shouldn't come over and set up a business under this scheme, but wait years and meanwhile work under one of the old, more expensive and less suitable schemes, so as not to be thought of as taking advantage of France in some way.  What is the point of all this European legislation to make it possible for people to move within the EEA, whether working or not, if the people concerned are going to be harassed about doing it - more so by people who have moved from the same country than from either other immigrants or the natives, it seems!

I think one of the reasons this scheme was introduced was to get more people to get up and do business activities, however small, which will involve them paying contributions into the system - money that wouldn't have been coming in before.  People who might not have bothered before (or might even, shock horror, have worked on the black) because it was too complicated or expensive.  Maybe some of those French people who have left to go to the UK because of easier conditions might return to France now that things are getting less complicated.  I don't think the government can turn round and say 'By the way - we want your contributions but don't expect them to cover you for anything for X amount of years.' but who knows, we'll see!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deb - to he honest I think you are trying to dot Is and cross Ts for a scheme that is still in development, having only been in operation for a very short time and asking 'what if' questions that even the people whom you should be asking - i.e. French officials - are unlikely to be able to answer, let alone people on this forum. I certainly cannot help you any further.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@the other Deb!

Although I know a reasonable amount about healthcare for the inactif, I'm certainly no expert on the situation for the employed.  For that you need Will more than me, and he has explained this pretty fully, imo, as is his wont.

As to how one's E form cover is affected by taking up employment, I would say "it depends"!  If you have an "inactif's" E106 then this is normally just that - a residual benefit for those whose employment is terminated, but who have not yet reached UK state retirement age.  AFAIK, if you work either for an employer or for yourself, then your social security benefits must come via your employment, not an E form.  As these only last for a maximum of 30 months (18 if you were self employed), then after a year of AE you wouldn't have much entitlement left anyway after you'd ducked out of the scheme.  However, to be certain that I am correct, you should ask the centre for non residents in Newcastle - they alone can give you a difinitive answer.

Morally, I can see, as I said above, why those who run businesses in the traditional way, are getting hot under the collar now that a scheme apparently exists whereby others can get health cover for a relative pittance.  I'm not sure if the French Governement has, as yet, fully woken up to the implications of this.  I don't think a few expats are the problem but in truth, it seems to me, that any old chancer can register as an AE, declare a couple of hours' work from time to time, and get all the social security benefits which others (including me, as a retired imigrant) pay through the nose for.  It is a bit p*ss*ng off, I'll grant you, but hey, if it really is a legit' way to do this - and I can't see the flaws as yet - then I say go for it.  If it had been an option for me, and if I'd had any sort of job or wanted to do one, I'd certainly have a go.  It seems above board to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Will"]

Deb - to he honest I think you are trying to dot Is and cross Ts for a scheme that is still in development, having only been in operation for a very short time and asking 'what if' questions that even the people whom you should be asking - i.e. French officials - are unlikely to be able to answer, let alone people on this forum. I certainly cannot help you any further.[/quote]OK - thank you for your help and opinions.  Just in case anyone else can help, please chip in! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Debnfamily"]Ah - just clicked about what you meant about the worker's E106 - you mention the E101 form, which is issued along with an E106 (the same E106) to people who are working temporarily (less than a year - which can exceptionally be extended to two years). [/quote]Just to put you right on E106's.

There are most definitely 2 types. The common one for below retirement age 'inactifs' is issued by The DWP and is valid for up to 2.5 years depending on NI record and the actual time of year you apply for it as it runs from January to January.

The second type, which I hold so know what I'm talking about, is issued by HMRC and is intended for people like myself who are French resident but still working in UK and paying tax & NI. It is renewed annually on the anniversary of the initial issue, September in my case, and will be similarly renewed for as long as I continue working and paying NI. If at that time I am under 65 then I will be entitled to a conventional DWP E106 for up to a further 2.5 years, or to age 65, whichever is the sooner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Ernie - I was hoping you would be along to confirm that from your actual experience. [:D]

I'll just add one other thing based on my own experience, which may not be relevant to Debs' situation but is worth others bearing in mind. If you start your own business, you  cannot be 'piggy-backed' onto a spouse's French healthcare entitlement, you have to pay your own cotisations. When I started in business in France I could not link to Judie's health cover. This was pre-AE, and she was covered as a salaried employee rather than through an E form, but the same principle applies. 

And obviously, if you have an E121 based on incapacity rather than age the authorities are likely to take a rather dim view of starting a business and continuing to receive benefits (and here I refer to the E121 holders themselves rather than any dependants).

Thanks too Cooperlola for the further clarification on E forms. I'm not implying that the 'other' Deb is considering doing anything wrong by starting as an AE - the system appears to permit this. Just that I cannot see that part of the system lasting, for exactly the reasons that Cooperlola gives. And I think she is right to be wary of how any possible implications might affect her and her family.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="cooperlola"]@the other Deb!

you should ask the centre for non residents in Newcastle - they alone can give you a difinitive answer.

[/quote]I'll certainly get my husband to do that to check what his position would be, when they are open.  I was just trying to get a bit of info quickly because of other pressing matters which bring this one to the fore.  There probably will be some sort of minimum time or payment amount to have full entitlement, somewhere in the small print - or maybe not.

Gosh the posts are coming fast now (just got ernie's via email).  I still beg to differ - an E106 is an E106 is an E106, even if they might be issued in different circumstances or in your case by the sound of it, by different offices.  The point is, I think, that the reason of issue would determine whether it would be overriden by taking up an activity in France which involved paying contributions.  So in your case, or a temporarily posted worker's case, it might not, you might just acquire insurance with France on top of that you have with the UK (ie so you could get a pension and other benefits from France as well as the UK but the UK, where your main contributions are paid, would presumably still be considered your country of insurance) but for someone who wasn't still paying insurance in the UK, the French contributions would take over and that would be their current country of insurance.  I think that would be my position because I'm not still paying full contributions in the UK.  What I'm trying to figure out is if France became my country of insurance, would it be the country of insurance of my whole family - including my husband, who would remain inactive.  But like Will and Deb said, this probably isn't the place to ask.

edit to reply to will's bit: yes, that all fits in with the way I'm reading it.  I'm glad you can see why I'm worried!  I need to generate some extra income somehow, rather than go running back to the UK to avoid exchange rate nightmares and be under the safe umbrella of the UK social security and health system, which is sometimes tempting, believe me!  I have a few ideas but don't want to do something until I understand what will happen.  Property isn't selling very well anywhere at the moment so getting cash that way is out and so starting work in some way is the only way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Debnfamily"]I still beg to differ - an E106 is an E106 is an E106, even if they might be issued in different circumstances or in your case by the sound of it, by different offices.  The point is, I think, that the reason of issue would determine whether it would be overriden by taking up an activity in France which involved paying contributions.[/quote]Agreed in that sense but it was not the point I was making which was simply that there are 2 distinctly different flavours of E106.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Will"] If anybody has a bona-fide business, is earning under the AE limits with no other income, and can afford to live, then good luck to you.[/quote]

Will,

I'm puzzled why you keep saying this sort of thing. Taking most professions liberales as the example I'm most familiar with, business expenses are generally fairly low: let's say 10% of turnover, typically. You are allowed to have a turnover up to €32,000 on which you pay a total of 20.5% tax + cotisations. Let's assume a business billing €2,000 per month (24K/year) . That brings in

24,000

- 4,920 (20.5% charges)

- 2,400 (10% expenses)

= 16,880 Euros

Assuming that you don't have a mortgage then that is a liveable income. We keep getting reminded that French paysans bring up 15 kids on about half that. With both members of a couple earning then it's definitely comfortable.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Albert, I'm pleased that you are able to live on such a small sum.

We have of course discussed this before. I personally feel, borne out by my own experiences, that 30% is a more realistic figure for costs and expenses. But the nature of my business means that I spend a lot on travel, which does not come cheap. I was thinking more of the artisan type of business - we were talking about roofers - where tools, materials and consumables have to be bought. I know some micro businesses get the customer to supply materials in order to stay within the turnover limits, but that is, to be honest, a bit of a fiddle for various reasons. There is also the TVA question for micro and AE businesses - if you have to buy these at 19.6% TVA, which you cannot recover, and have to compete with TVA-registered businesses who can charge customers 5.5% on some work that's another big nail in the coffin.

If you are in the fortunate position of paying neither mortgage nor rent then that makes a big difference, though many artisans and commercants have rent to pay for business premises. Also if you have an additional income from your spouse it puts a whole new complexion on things. Many tradesmen have familes, though, so that limits things in that respect.

Incidentally, the average annual income per household in our commune, according to INSEE, is 9045€. So I agree with you that many of them would probably be overjoyed to be earning close to the AE limits. 32,000€ less cotisations/tax at 23% also compares pretty favourably with the SMIC so I don't doubt it is a living wage. 

Most of all, though, as most people here say that they have moved to France for quality of life, I don't think scrimping and penny-pinching contributes to that better quality of life, though I accept that more than just material things add up to a good existence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...