The new legislation does affect French nationals.

[Chancer]

This question has been in my mind for some time and I think woolybanana has raised it, I have been waiting to question one of two French friends who are in the situation that I will be in when I finish my work.

They are both around 35 and gave up their jobs to buy and convert property for rental, they both now live on and declare their rental income. In fact between them they run a thriving "black" building firm but that is not relevant to this.

I already knew from another landlord that his revenues from property rental were declared as "non professional income" but he was paying cotisations on his "professional" job.

Tonight I had a long dicussion with one of the other two, he confirmed that his rental income was non professional, I asked him about cotisations and health care and he said he was very worried. He has a carte vitale from his last employment (a factory job) 3 years ago which will run out in 2008, he also said that he had already approached the relevant authority (CMU?) to ask if he could pay cotisations when his carte vitale expires and was told "no, that is not possible, you do not have professional income and are considered inactif".

He explained that if he were able to claim RMU (he called it SMIC) he would get cover but his revenues were above the ceiling so he didnt qualify. He has some time so is exploring his options, one of which is to take a job for the minimum time to regain his benefits, the other is to see if he can be affiliated to his concubines carte vitale, but as she doesnt work he is not sure.

The other person we believe is on his wifes carte vitale as she works as an institutrice.

My friend is not well educated or wordly wise and should not be taken as an authority but clearly he is worried and had made his approaches one year ago well before the current rulings on foreign inactifs.

For me this raises two issues:

One - If the government is treating early retired UK inactifs in the same way as its own citizens, and let us not forget before now they were able to join the CMU and French citizens in the same situation (my friend) weren't, then this is a major obstacle to the lobbying movement.

Two - The question of professional versus non professional activity/occupation needs to be considered, if a landlord is considered non professional then where does that leave all the chambre d'hotes operators? Regardless of whether or not they have already declared their income.

I will be away for the weekend so will not be able to reply for a while.

 

[Will]

Although the above is basically useful and interesting, it cannot be taken too seriously, unfortunately.

First of all anybody - particularly a Frenchman - who apparently does not know the difference betwen RMI and SMIC is not somebody I would wish to believe (unless it was a genuine slip of the tongue, of course).

But more seriously, this person's carte vitale should have ceased to be valid as soon as the reason for issuing it - i.e. employment - ceased. I suspect that if he tries using the card he will find it will be rejected. If he has used it in the last three years then his CPAM has surely made an error. Or maybe there is more to this than meets the eye - you have already said they run a 'black' building operation, so could they, like quite a few others, be registered unemployed (and thus probably still have valid health cover) while living off rental income and working au noir?

On the contrary, this person sounds very 'worldly wise' under the surface, particularly in view of the closer scrutiny promised by Sarko which applies to all 'non-workers', not only the British.

 

[cooperlola]

I think Will has hit the nail on the head - as per. 

There are no rule changes whatsoever - and have never been - to the CMU information on the CPAM website - the qualifications remain the same.  In fact, a paper confirming that the CMU in its present form is here to stay was issued to the press at the end of last month.  The only glaring change was the non availability for non-French EU citizens classified as inactif.

This couple sounds like they're milking the system for all it's worth. I hope they are pursued with the same dilligence that is being applied to us![6]

[samdebretagne]

[quote user="Will"]

But more seriously, this person's carte vitale should have ceased to be valid as soon as the reason for issuing it - i.e. employment - ceased. I suspect that if he tries using the card he will find it will be rejected. If he has used it in the last three years then his CPAM has surely made an error.

[/quote]

After my first job here ended, I was told I would be covered by the sécu for four years, even if I never worked another day.  It sounds like this person could be in the same situation, since next year will make four years for him as well.

[Clair]

Health care cover can continue for a minimum of 12 months and up to four years after loss of employment.

http://info.assedic.fr/demandeurs_emploi/

[Will]

Thanks for the information. It's certainly different if you are self employed.

So the answer is for everybody - as it always has been for certain freeloaders - get a job, get fired, and you have four years health cover?

[sikhim]

Hi,

re: this person's carte vitale should have ceased to be valid as soon as the reason for issuing it - i.e. employment - ceased.

I don't think this is quite correct as entitlement to healthcare (remboursements en nature - reimbursements of medical expenses) used to last for a period for four years after employment ceased (for somebody in salaried employment)

this has now been reduced to one year, since February 2007. 

CPAM will now review files to verify entitlement to reimbursements on a yearly basis, as opposed to every four years, so his file has probably not come up for review yet.

I had a good look on the Internet to see if there is anything on any of the government websites to indicate the new CMU regulations could apply to French citizens:

In Communiqués et dossiers de Presse on the ameli.fr website, there is a document headed  La CMU : l'assurance maladie pour tous en 2007

On page 4 of this document is a note which states:  A noter : les ressortissants communautaires inactifs qui viennent s’installer en France ne peuvent

le faire que s’ils disposent de ressources suffisantes et d’une couverture maladie préalable. Ils ne peuvent donc pas prétendre au bénéfice de la CMU de base et de la CMU complémentaire  4.

and note 4 says: 4 En application de la directive 2004/38/CE du Parlement Européen et du Conseil du 29 avril 2004 transposée en

droit français par la loi n°2006-911 du 24 juillet 2006 relative à l’immigration et à l’intégration et le décret n°2007-371

du 21 mars 2007

To me, this strongly indicates that French citizens can still join the CMU as they obviously are not "ressortissants communautaires inactifs". Well, they can be "inactifs" but they are not "ressortissants communautaires", they are French citizens.

Does anybody agree with my interpretation ?

best regards

Dominique

 

[Clair]

[quote user="Will"]

Thanks for the information. It's certainly different if you are self employed.

So the answer is for everybody - as it always has been for certain freeloaders - get a job, get fired, and you have four years health cover?

[/quote]

12 months is the norm. Certain aspects of the cover can extend to four years.

After that period, it appears to be rather ambiguous(my bold)

[quote]Vous pouvez bénéficier du remboursement des frais médicaux,

pharmaceutiques et d'hospitalisation dans le cadre du régime général de

la sécurité sociale.

Pour les chômeurs ayant épuisé leurs droits aux allocations, il leur suffira d'être à la recherche d'un emploi.

Pour les autres, une demande de couverture doit être effectuée dans

le cadre de la Couverture Maladie Universelle auprès de la Caisse de

sécurité sociale du lieu de résidence[/quote]

Those unemployed whose rights have come to an end are told it's enought to be "looking for a job".

The others ( those whose rights have not?) are told to request CMU cover from their CPAM...

[BJSLIV]

Changes to the rules to exclude French inactifs would  be fairly  pointless. I assume that 99% would  qualify for the CMU on the grounds of  more than five years residence.......

[Danny]

[quote user="BJSLIV"]Changes to the rules to exclude French inactifs would  be fairly  pointless. I assume that 99% would  qualify for the CMU on the grounds of  more than five years residence.......[/quote]

Sorry if I don't get that but... If French inactifs were also excluded, there is no recourse to the "five years residence" rule for other nationalities. The five years residence rules apply only to EU foreigners, not to Nationals, and it gives them the same rights as Nationals. So, if that is correct, foreign EU inactifs will be in the same boat as the nationals and both will be without health cover.

Unless I am getting well confused, of course.

Danny

[cooperlola]

Thanks to Makfai (as ever) for this;

This is from the French Government's own site and should shed some light on the issue of whether any French Nationals are excluded from the system. 

EST-IL POSSIBLE DE QUITTER LA SECURITE SOCIALE ET SOUSCRIRE UNIQUEMENT UNE ASSURANCE PRIVEE EN FRANCE OU A L’ETRANGER ?

Non, la législation française ne le permet pas. Toute personne qui travaille et réside en France est obligatoirement affiliée au régime de sécurité sociale dont elle relève : régime général des salariés, régimes de non-salariés ou régimes spéciaux (par exemple le régime de la SNCF). Et à ce titre, elle est assujettie aux cotisations de sécurité sociale correspondantes, à la CSG et à la CRDS.

http://www.securite-sociale.fr/comprendre/europe/monopolesecu/monopole.htm#c1

 

If your researchers wish to check further they will find this is supported by the following French legislation:

Loi DDOS of 4th February 1995 and Loi 99-641 CMU of 27th July 1999

 

No alteration has been made to this except for non French EU citizens, as the poster (sikhim)quoted above.  What interests me about the communique which sikhim quotes (dated October) is that it says inactive EU citizens who come to live in France.... NOT those who are living in France already ... although I doubt whether one could make that strong a case on this semantic point alone.

[Helen]

[quote user="cooperlola"]

 

 

Loi DDOS of 4th February 1995 and Loi 99-641 CMU of 27th July 1999

 

No alteration has been made to this except for non French EU citizens, as the poster (sikhim)quoted above.  What interests me about the communique which sikhim quotes (dated October) is that it says inactive EU citizens who come to live in France.... NOT those who are living in France already ... although I doubt whether one could make that strong a case on this semantic point alone.

[/quote]

They use a similar tense in the original point d'information' as translated on the Frech ambassadors site ' inactive EU citizens coming to live in our country cannot have a right of residence unless they already possess medical cover.' but  the code also states that you can only have a titre de sejour for as long as the health insurance lasts .

[woolybanana]

I wonder if this is relevant for French nationals, not expats of course?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VVHe8Tk73k&mode=related&search=

[sikhim]

It does say  Toute personne qui travaille et réside en France, not "Toute personne qui travaille et/ou réside en France".

I understand it to mean people who work AND  are resident in France, hence it does not appear to apply to people living in, but not working in France.

With regard to the semantics of using the verb "come" as opposed to "living", I would think this is significant as the text would surely have been carefully checked prior to publication.

If so, it follows the recent trends and posts on various websites and forums indicating that people who have been here for five years may not be excluded.

Dominique

[cooperlola]

It is worth looking through all the documents linked to makfai's piece, including the rules for private insurance providers;

http://www.securite-sociale.fr/communications/presse/2006/monopole/europe.pdf

The third paragraph is interesting.

[chessfou]

[quote]The third paragraph is interesting.[cooperlola][/quote]

It would be interesting ... but for the specific reference to "citoyens français." Although I suppose it can still be considered interesting for the "5-year-rulers."

[cooperlola]

[quote user="chessfou"][quote]The third paragraph is interesting.[cooperlola][/quote]

It would be interesting ... but for the specific reference to "citoyens français." Although I suppose it can still be considered interesting for the "5-year-rulers."
[/quote]The citroyens francais bit was my point chessfou - it was a response to the title of this thread - not a possible get out for non-French Europeans!

[Sunday Driver]

Here's a more recent communication concerning private insurance providers:

http://www.securite-sociale.fr/communications/presse/2007/20070122_affiliiation_sec_soc.pdf

It reaffirms "l’obligation d’affiliation à la sécurité sociale pour toutes les personnes qui travaillent et résident en France."

I suppose that covers the majority of people who might be tempted to forsake their obligatory state affilliation for the private sector and explains why there is essentially no market for private healthcare in France.  However, as CMU is no longer an obligatory regime for UK expats, then it leaves us free to go private....

 

[Maricopa]

But if you watch the video link supplied by WB, it IS possible for French nationals to take out PHI[8-)]

[Cat]

I've managed to find the website featured in the news report that WB posted, and it does seem to confirm that working French nationals can take out private health insurance http://www.conscience-politique.org/cgi-bin/gestionnews/news2.cgi?id=mlps170506

[BJSLIV]

I think the point is that the French are  in breach of EU law on a technicality because they gave the job of collecting the statutory contributions to the chosen caisses without going through a tendering process.

The right to impose a statutory scheme is not in question ; See the EU briefing posted by cooperlola at 18:30 yesterday (17 November)

It all comes about because the Caisses and their collection arms aren't formally part of government, if they were part of the Tresor Public the problem wouldn't arise.

There are a number of pressure groups trying to escape the statutory schemes because as high earners it is indeed cheaper for them to pay privately, until they become seriously ill.......and then they would quickly rejoin if they found they weren't that wealthy.

[Maricopa]

[quote user="BJSLIV"]as high earners it is indeed cheaper for them to pay privately, until they become seriously ill.......and then they would quickly rejoin if they found they weren't that wealthy.[/quote]

My thoughts exactly[:D]

[Ron Avery]

"But if you watch the video link supplied by WB, it IS possible for French nationals to take out PHI"

They always could, there are private hospitals in France, but they cannot ONLY have PHI. they have to be in the state system as well.

[BJSLIV]

[quote user="Ron Avery"]They always could, there a private hospitals in France, but they cannot  ONLY have PHI., they have to be in the state system as well.[/quote]

However the pressure groups are claiming that it is illegal  to make people pay the compulsory charges because of the EU ruling, even though the EU say that is untrue!

[Maricopa]

[quote user="Ron Avery"]

They always could, there are private hospitals in France, but they cannot ONLY have PHI. they have to be in the state system as well.

[/quote]

The doctor shown in the video paid 9000 euros in cotistations, and his costs were reduced to 6000 odd for his alternative cover.  Why would he pay that in addition to the 9000?  That would be economic suicide.  In the clip these people did not pay both.[8-)]