French Healthcare for British Expats

[marky]

   

I am very concerned to read in the Sunday Times (2.9.07) that non French nationals who have been resident in France over 2 years but are not at retirement age and are not working in France will not be able to join the French Health care system from 30.9.07. Does anybody know any more details. What if you pay 8% social charges on investment income can you be in the state system? If you cannot join the state system do you still pay the 8% social charges. Are children entitled to join the state system even if their parents or not registered or do they need insurance? I have seen the newsflash by "Exclusive Helthcare" which suggests this is all true but they obviously have a vested interest. As an EU member I cannot believe after paying National Insurance for many years I am not entitled to any state cover whether in the UK or France once the E106 has run out after 2 years. Can any one help or suggest where I can get a definite answer. Marky

[cooperlola]

We are discussing this here:

http://www.completefrance.com/cs/forums/1011687/ShowPost.aspx

Edit : as far as your entitlement to health care from the UK, the DWP (or whatever it's called these days) document says : "If you are going to live, but not work, in another EEA country, you may get health cover from the UK for yourself, and for any members of your family who depend on you and who go with you, under the state scheme of the other country but this cover will only be for a limited time.  When this period ends the UK cannot give you any more healthcare cover " [unless you meet certain other conditions - mostly these apply to the disabled and other very specific groups - my words].

"If you do not meet the rules for the form E106 yourself, and cannot be covered as a member of the family of someone who you will depend on and live with, you may be able to pay voluntary contributions to the state sickness scheme of the country you move to. This depends on the law of that country.  If not, you will have to take out private medical insurance. "

My italics.

[Ruth]

I too read this article which gave the impression  that expats had previously enjoyed free healthcare in France when retiring early. We retired in 1995 and paid a lot of mony to BUPA International to cover us just for hospital care. We were relieved when the Loi Aubry came in and we were able to join the French system - contributions according to our income....much cheaper than BUPA International but for more. No question of free healthcare which was not normal for the French too. We paid for topup but this still worked out cheaper than BUPA. We are now on UK State pensions and don't still get free healthcare.....like the French. The UK contribute but we still pay for topup. Recently I had 2 minor strokes and have been granted 100% reimbursment for anything relating to this. There is NO free healthcare in France for such as retired diplomats as suggested by the article but I presume that certain companies may be happy if this idea continues.

[cooperlola]

I don't think there is any suggestion that those who have passed UK retirement age and are entitled to E121's will be affected.  It is just a concern (and that's all it is at the moment) for those of us who are living here but not working - and then only the early-retired.

o/p : If by "Social Charges" - you refer to the portion of unearned income which is taxed to help pay off the French national debt - then yes, that will still be payable.  However, if this scare story has any basis in truth, then what you won't have to pay any longer is your CMU contribution.

[marky]

    Thanks. I have now read all the other posts and see you have been discussing this subject. I felt better after SD suggested that is was only the Complemetary CMU (low income) that was going to be withdrawn and as long as you had resources and paid into the CMU it would still be available. All the reference to the "fraud prevention" measures then confused me again.Can  anyone  clarify.

Sorry to appear a bit dense but this is all new to me.

[cooperlola]

You are not being dense!  In a nutshell, there is much being said on this subject - some fact, some speculation and this mixture is very hard to sort through.  If you pay your taxes here, fill in your tax forms correctly, provide your CPAM with the paperwork which any letter you may get from them demands, then pay your contributions, you should be fine at least for the moment.  However, I suspect that if you have property and income in the UK which provide you with means which allow you to live above what might be inferred from the income you declare - then you could become the subject of some sort of fraud investigation.  Do it by the book.  Apart from that, like the rest of us, all you can do is wait and see.

[Will]

Not dense at all, there is a lot in these recent updates to the residency requirements that nobody is quite sure how it will be interpreted. It's something to be aware of, but not to panic about yet.

[Tony F Dordogne]

OK, so if I understand this correctly, the new legislation will not effect OH and I - she is past statutory retirement age and I'm on my own E121 because of the leukaemia thingy that I have despite being under statutory retirement age.

If this new legislation is aimed at the CMU claimants - asset rich but no visible/taxable meands of support, ex-pats/immigrants coming to France and claiming CMU because of their low income - any ideas how it will effect those ex-pats who are registered as artisans/workers with the various caisse, don't make enough to live on (in theory or reality) and get CMU?

Seems like the asset rich/no evident taxable means of support are going to get caught by the Al Capone method - if you've got no declared income and therefore don't have to pay tax and therefore get the CMU, how do you have the assets to live on?  

[cooperlola]

Tony - yup - by my interpretation at any rate, those covered by E forms are not affected.

The legislation seems to apply to "non-workers" but that's only important if all the rumours about the means of claimants turn out to be fact (either now or in the future.)  If you are a genuine job-seeker then it's not clear if you would be affected or not.  Because most of this is speculation, then we don't really know yet, but I would suspect that this is where the talked about investigations into lifestyle etc will come in.  If you appear to be living very well but are signed on as "unemployed" then no doubt these are the very people who will be heavily scrutised - be they immigrants or French nationals.

I guess if you are asset rich and claiming, then you'll be expected to cash in your assets to pay for healthcare!!! Seriously, maybe this hasn't been thought through yet....

[Ruth]

I just feel that the Sunday Times article gave the impression that in France those who retired to France...early or not had been previously all entitled to FREE healthcare!! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mint]

The Times is definitely not the paper it was when it was a broadsheet.  Tabloids do tend to go for the sensational.  If you want to find out about, for example, ordinary British life, you wouldn't just get your information from Big Brother, would you?

[makfai]

Does the issue here relate to "non-workers" no matter how much their income is and what they contribute via taxes etc?  I suspect that some (OK a minority) may be declaring more in income than some workers and that the formers' contribution (because of the actual value of their %) might be higher.

If the legislation is specifically referring to "non-workers" rather than 'non-contributors'  it seems a bit odd. I would have thought the best approach was to set a minimum contribution rate and people not meeting it automatically based on their tax assessments (or even voluntarily if they fell below thresholds on the tax side but wanted to 'opt-in') would then be excluded.

However, I don't know!!! Pass the Valium while I can afford it!!

 

[Owen]

Hello Sweet 17,

I share your sentiments entirely.  Healthcare planning based on Rupert Murdoch scribblers and a quote from a health insurer are hardly impartial or necessarily competent sources of information.

There will be "casualties" with this legislation but they should be relatively few depending on  proper healthcare preparation being done in the in the first place.

 

Regards

 

Owen

[email protected]

[cooperlola]

Will had it right in another thread : "Don't panic".  So much is speculation, wait until this is actually happening before losing too many nights' sleep over - as Sweet 17, Owen and others have pointed out - what is at the moment being surmised from something which is not yet on the statute books.  Personally, I see no harm in getting a few quotes in the meantime for full health cover, just in case this happens.  Then, at least, you will be properly informed about the choices and will be able to chose the right company - should you need to - to suit your needs, and not be forced into a hurried decision.  Apart from that, there's not much you can do so it's not worth getting your underwear in a twist over.

As to what would constitute a "contributer" - there would be a lot to iron out.  For instance in the case of those who took early retirement but who don't receive the state "old-age" pension :  People like me who have company retirement pensions, pay all our taxes in France, plus our 8% to the CMU.  Anybody on a UK government pension pays income tax back in the UK and CMU contributions here (Although I may have this wrong, and they are perhaps covered by E121's but I don't think so).  Is anybody saying that the former might be allowed to remain in the CMU but the latter not?  There seems to me to be little point in speculating about something which even the government here may not yet have decided upon.

[Ron Avery]

marky wrote .....

   

"What if you pay 8% social charges on investment income can you be in the state system?  If you cannot join the state system do you still pay the 8% social charges". There is no connection whatsoever betweeen social charges and the health care contributions. Social charges are payments towards the provision of French social services and are based on unearned income declared on your tax return, not earned income. Healthcare charges are for healthcare and based on total income.  Payment of the former does not give any rights to the latter.  In fact if the level of income is such that you do not "earn" enough to have to pay for healthcare it seems from what is being said, you may now be excluded from the French healthcare system and have to pay for it or get insurance, but still have to pay social charges on unearned income.

 

[Ron Avery]

[quote user="cooperlola"]

 as Sweet 17, Owen and others have pointed out - what is at the moment being surmised from something which is not yet on the statute books.  [/quote]

If it is not yet law coops, how come it comes into effect on 30 September?  Or is that because that is the deadline date for reaffirmation of residence that folk think that is the case.  Now I am confused!!

[cooperlola]

So am I Ron, so am I.  The law (which was quoted in one of these threads) which comes in in September, being that which required an annual check on residency status (hence our letters) is - as far as I know - not in doubt. 

http://www.exclusivehealthcare.com/item.php?ItemId=220

 The conjecture which I refer to is merely that about "non-working" people who currently are entitled to CMU cover and may not be in the future.  That is the part which, I think I understand - and I can't stress the word think enough! - is being bandied about in these newspaper articles and which, thus far, nobody has satisfied me, at least, is on the near horizon.  But the intertwining of these two separate issues has got very confused.  One poster on here (in yet another thread) has already fallen foul of this.  However, even the article on the Exclusive Healthcare website -which has  an undoubted vested interest - sugests that this is not happening universally.  Until it does and we have more evidence that it will, I don't think we should do more than plan for the possibility.  Panicking over something like this does nothing but send up our blood pressure.

[BJSLIV]

does nothing but send up our blood pressure

Doubly worrying if what you were worrying about was the possible absence of any health-cover............[:D]

[cooperlola]

Interestingly, I have just had a call from Exclusive Healthcare, as I am currenly researching the costs of a variety of full health care packages, just in case.  The lady tells me that they already have had clients who already subscribe to the CMU system who have difinitively been refused continued membership and who have been asked to return their Cartes Vitales.  Yes, they have a vested interest, but she did not try to push me into signing up, just warned me that we may be affected, and that the various CPAM's are interpreting these things differently at present.  She stressed that it would not be until our documents had been processed centrally that we could be certain of the outcome either way.  Given the source, you may interpret that as you wish.  She said that they are in constant touch with the Embassy in London and will keep their website updated as and when they have more news/evidence.

Edit : Should this be of interest to anybody - here are details of their policy and rates

http://www.exclusivehealthcare.com/File/client/Plan%20Platine%202007.pdf

when I find others, I'll add them.  It may be good to have a few different companies' names and policies to hand if this happens, non?

Exeter Friendly Society

http://www.exeterfriendly.co.uk/interplan_euro.htm

[Rob]

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?

[Clair]

[quote user="Rob"]What the hell is the AME?[/quote]

More details here: L'Aide Médicale de l'Etat

[Chris]

I know all this is still very confused and uncertain, but what about those medically early retired and receiving UK Incapacity Benefit, ie unable to work, rather than choosing not to work. As I understand it, receiving this benefit gives entry to the French health system - will this no longer be the case?  If so, one way forward might be for my wife to start a small (tiny) business (selling the daily egg from our hen??) and cover us by paying the (fairly small) charges..or am I missing something here?
Chris

[cooperlola]

Those on E121s (which are available to those on long-term incapacity benefit, severe disablement allowance, widow's benefits and berevement benefits - I believe) are not affected.

Setting up a small business is one of the options suggested in the newletter to which Rob refers, above.

[Ron Avery]

"or am I missing something here"

Yes, the reforms, whatever they may be, do not apply to holders of E 121s, their healthcare whilst the E 121 is valid is paid for by the UK.  However, there were noises in the UK before the last election about tightening up on IB and getting the sick back to work, so things could change and IB recipients may have to be available to work, presumably in the UK, to continue to receive it, if the UK reforms ever become law.

[woolybanana]

Given that a significant number of recipients of IB are quite capable of work, is this a problem? NOT ALL.