Social charges fraud

[woolybanana]

The Cour des Comptes reckons that illegal work and practices of different sorts run to between 20 and 25 billion euros.

The biggest culprits are les independents and autoentrepreneurs plus people working outside France but supposed to pay charges here.

The answer apparently is to increase the number of investigators or create a special police force for this sin alone.

Any other ideas anyone?

[Gardian]

WB .................

Do they mean avoided tax or taxable income?  Whatever, its still a lot and probably understated.

You have to somehow change the culture: cash in the hand work is rife around here and I don't doubt just about everywhere else in France.

It needs a couple of 'investigators' in every Hotel des Impots to pick a few people at random and ask them how they're managing to run a halfway decent car, live in halfway decent accommodation and yet have a low tax return liability.  I could name a few not a million kms away from me.

I smile to myself at how diligent everybody on here is about an accurate tax return - to the last centime!  Correct of course and laudable, but .................

[Araucaria]

Possibly, just possibly, the French fisc might collect more in taxes if they made it just a little easier to work legally.

[mint]

Our medecin traitant was found to have been less than open about his social charges.  It was all over the papers and he was banned for 6 months.

Now he is back in his cabinet, perfectly at ease, and the queue outside his room is longer than ever.

We took the opportunity during his absence to change to another doctor in the practice.  Not so much because of his fraudulent activities but because his colleaque is a much better doctor and you don't feel that the new doctor is only interested in your cheque book.  Wait a minute, not even a cheque book, because he takes all types of carte bancaire.

[NormanH]

Doctors are quite often caught out implicated in fraud. Just a few days ago there was this case:

http://www.leparisien.fr/nice-06000/fraude-geante-a-la-secu-peines-de-prison-pour-un-pharmacien-et-des-medecins-10-09-2014-4124423.php

As I always say it isn't the patient who makes money out of the Sécu.  I for one would prefer not to need any money spending on me.

It is the same thing with the APL. That goes to the landlord in the end, it doesn't rest in the tenant's pocket.

Yet the myth persists that the person who needs help is the cheat....

[cardi]

Less a myth and more a case of professional propaganda and disinformation. The media go along for the ride.

[ventodue]

[quote user="woolybanana"]Any other ideas anyone?[/quote]

Reduce les cotisations sur l'employeur?  Which, if you've ever wondered, look like this (source:  CCI Paris Ile-de-France).  As they say, 'Trop de taxes, tue la taxe ...' 

To say nothing of all the administrative burden that goes with all this - and all the other administrative burdens imposed on employers.

But of course this would be a direct attack on the Socialist dream ...

 

Nature des contributions	Taux	Base de calcul mensuelle	Recouvrement
	Part employeur
Sécurité sociale (1)
contribution solidarité autonomie	0,30 %	Salaire total	URSSAF
assurance maladie	12,80 %	salaire total	URSSAF
assurance vieillesse plafonnée	8,45 %	de 0 à 3 129 €	URSSAF
assurance vieillesse déplafonnée	1,75 %	Salaire total	URSSAF
allocations familiales	5,25 %	salaire total	URSSAF
accidents du travail	Variable (2)	salaire total	URSSAF
aide au logement	0,10 %	de 0 à 3 129 €	URSSAF
supplément entreprise de 20 salariés et plus (FNAL)(3)	0.40%	de 0 à 3 129 €	URSSAF
	0,50 %	au-delà de 3 129 €
Assurance chômage
Cotisation chômage (4)	4%	de 0 à 12 516 €	URSSAF
Fonds de garantie des salaires	0,30 %	de 0 à 12 516 €	URSSAF
Retraite complémentaire (5)
AGFF Cadres et non cadres tranche 1	1,20 %	de 0 à 3 129 €	AGIRC/ARR
Cadres et non cadres tranche 2	1,30 %	de 3 129 à 9 387 €	ARRCO
APEC (cadres seulement)	0,036 %	de 0 à 12 516 €	AGIRC
Non-cadres tranche 1	4,58 %	de 0 à 3 129 €	ARRCO
Non-cadres tranche 2	12,08 %	de 3 129 à 9 387 €	ARRCO
Cadres
tranche A	4,58 %	de 0 à 3 129 €	ARRCO
tranche B	12,68 %	de 3 129 € à 12 516 €	AGIRC
tranche C	(20,43 %) répartition libre		AGIRC
CET	0,22 %	de 0 à 25 032 €	AGIRC
assurance décès	1,50 %	de 0 à 3 129 €	AGIRC
Formation professionnelle
Entreprise de moins de 10 salariés (6)	0,55 %	Masse salariale	OPCA ou trésor public
De 10 à moins de 20 salariés	1,05 %	Masse salariale	OPCA et sous conditions limitatives : formations des salariés de l'entreprise
Entreprise de 20 salariés ou plus (7)	1,60 %	Masse salariale	OPCA et sous conditions limitatives : formations des salariés de l'entreprise
Entreprise avec CDD (dit CIF-CDD)	1%	salaire CDD	OPCA ou trésor public
Autres taxes et participations
Taxe d'apprentissage (8)	0,50 %	Masse salariale	Organisme collecteur
Contribution au développement de l'apprentissage (8)	0,18%	Masse salariale	Organisme collecteur
Contribution supplémentaire à l'apprentissage (entreprises de 250 salariés et plus, sous conditions) (8)	0,10 %	Masse salariale	Organisme collecteur
	4,25 %	de 0 à 7664 €	Service des impôts des entreprises
Taxe sur les salaires (9)	8,50 %	de 7664 à 15 306 €
	13,60 %	de 15 306 € à 151 200 €
	20%	au delà de 151 200€
Versement transport (entreprises de plus de 9 salariés) (10)	variable	salaire total	URSSAF
Participation à l'effort de construction (entreprises de 20 salariés et plus) (11)	0,45 %	Masse salariale	Organisme collecteur ou, sous conditions, investissements directs

 

 

[woolybanana]

Hell, I did not know it was as bad as that. And each charge has its own little group of fonctionnaires getting paid vey well for working half time.

[Jonzjob]

But don't forget that it's only a job for life and not for ever, so they mustn't work too hard mate or there won't be a backlog for them to look at and comlain about the amount of work they would have if they did it [:-))]

[EuroTrash]

Income tax isn't the issue though is it, most people that work on the black don't earn enough to pay tax on it. So I don't think this would be anything to do with the impots, it would be URSSAF and their army of investigators. Who can be every bit as nasty if not nastier.

I know it's easy to have a pop at foncs but it is a thankless job and I wouldn't like to do it, the rules they have to interpret and apply are horrendously complicated and they don't seem to be properly trained when things change, they just get a constant stream of circulars chucked at them that they are somehow supposed to absorb.

[YCCMB]

[quote user="EuroTrash"]

I know it's easy to have a pop at foncs but it is a thankless job and I wouldn't like to do it...[/quote]

Yet popular folklore would have us believe that you're in a distinct minority.[:D]

[idun]

[quote user="woolybanana"]Hell, I did not know it was as bad as that. And each charge has its own little group of fonctionnaires getting paid vey well for working half time.[/quote]

ROFL wooly honestly had you never wondered why a french pay slip would

need to be two pages long, well there you go![:D] And the employee pays their percentages

too and so the government rake in a lot!

This is why self employed pay so much, they pay more or less the employeur and employees contributions.

IF I used to think it OTT, with everything being dissected,  now I'm not so

sure. NI contributions in the UK, which are less, and never the less seem to be viewed in

remarkable terms by most. They are for 'health' they are for 'pensions'

they are for 'unemployment' in some circumstances........... and don't

cover any of it, especially the pension. It irritates me beyond words

when people say that they have paid it for something specific, when in

reality it cannot cover much.

And the URSSAF, well I will not

say what a friend tells me about them, (too rude,) when they come in and controle the

company accounts........... they lack black uniforms and high leather boots apparently and

that is all.

And these xxxxxxx's have ended up costing us a lot

of money which I don't think that we should have paid. They may be

zealots, but each 'officer' works to their own interpretation and with

'malevolence'. And they try and stick their noses in, in things they are

not there to 'audit'.

All very well them going after companies who for the most part do things properly and they get their money in. Getting them to go after those that do not pay at all is quite something else.

[BIG MAC]

They need to simplify the whole process and strip out as many Foncs as possible.

A phone / PC APP where one can put in their earnings per month - less permitted business outgoings and then flat rated at 30%. Down then to the State to use it's buying power to buy the assurances just the same as we buy the NHS.

It seems to me that you need to have a degree in nuclear physics or some such to do a tax return ..pointless over administration.

[EuroTrash]

"It seems to me that you need to have a degree in nuclear physics or some such to do a tax return"

???

Tax returns are easy aren't they? Specially if you do it online. All you do is copy figures from various bits of paper into the right boxes.

They don't leave much room for being creative.

You are right about the foncs but it doesn't seem to me that the the impots is as over-fonc'ed as other services.

[idun]

If it is that much of a problem, surely you can do a paper declaration? Don't the impots people still have seances at the Mairies or local centres sociales where one can get help?

[Jonzjob]

"Don't the impots people still have seances at the Mairies or local centres sociales where one can get help"

No [8-)][8-)][:-))]

Not in the 10 years we did bin here?

[woolybanana]

Quite simples, really; if there is fraud it is because there can be. Systems need to be fraud proofed as far as possible. And taxes need to be seen to be reasonable, which they are not.

I doubt that small groups of inspectors handing out fines is enough to stop the problem.

On the other hand, in order to distract attention from other, perhaps more severe, problems, it is too easy to take aim at a straw man or woman to blame. Accusations of general tax evasion or avoidance, social security fraud etc may be just examples of this.

Examples, who are the workers in the building trade supposed to be on the black? My guess is that many are illegals in the country. First part of solution, crack down on illegals. Second, rather than relying on a system of spying, dobbing people in, look at it another way; turnover and tax paid give a broad brush of work done. Relate this to the avergaes in the sector - then, if there are irregularities, it is possible that there is fraud.

Maybe they do this anyway.

Better to reform the whole system byt Hollande seems incapable of doin g anything except moaning about the Germans.

[NormanH]

[quote user="Jonzjob"]"Don't the impots people still have seances at the Mairies or local centres sociales where one can get help"

No [8-)][8-)][:-))]

Not in the 10 years we did bin here?

[/quote]

Yes this is common in many larger towns, but perhaps not in villages:

for example http://www.besancon.fr/index.php?p=131&art_id=134&detailId=1020

[EuroTrash]

I think we need to be a bit clearer on the difference between income tax and social charges.

I don't think income tax fraud is worse in France than anywhere else and I think it's under control. For us plebs, income tax isn't an issue in any case, it's negligible. A surprisingly high proportion of French households don't pay any income tax. At the other end of the scale, high taxpayers will always pit their wits against the tax authorities, it's all part of the game.

I think that as per the heading of the thread it's social security fraud that isn't under control. The reason people want to avoid paying cotisations is because the charges are so high, and the reason they get away with it is because the system is way too complex with too many different organisations involved. It needs to be streamlined, and then the admin costs should be a lot less so the charges wouldn't need to be so high. And then if cotisations come down, business overheads will be reduced and businesses can reduce prices which will make them more competitive internationally which will be good for exports, and also businesses will be able to afford to employ more staff so France's chomage bill will come down. Simples, but will Hollande ever understand that, not a chance.

[NormanH]

Simples, but will Hollande ever understand that, not a chance.

I really don't think it is fair to lay this at Hollande's door.

Chirac (twice) and Sarkozy did nothing about these things either.

[EuroTrash]

"Chirac (twice) and Sarkozy did nothing about these things either."

I don't remember Chirac.

Sarkozy introduced the auto entrepreneur system which was itself a great step forward IMHO, but being a new concept it needed watching carefully and 'snagging' and refining as problems came to light. Problems have come to light, one of which is that there is potential for abuse by using it to avoid social charges. Hollande inherited AE and instead of refining it he darn near scuppered the whole concept. Fortunately he hasn't quite, but neither has he stopped the loopholes. So it is still being used as a cloak for travail dissimulé and it is still being used by Brits as a way of getting cheap healthcare.

AE was Sarko's baby and had he stayed, I think he would have brought it up better.

As for reorganising the entire sécu system, no I agree that Hollande is not alone in not doing that - but nobody else had as much pressure on them to do something about it to get France out of the doldrums.

[lindal1000]

Nobody except for other Brits have ever moaned about people using AE to get cheap healthcare, because if you look at it, it isn't that cheap. It is also just as easy to do undeclared work with a SARL as it is with an AE.

If you have a turnover of more that about 15000 you are better off on another regime where you can offset costs against turnover

[EuroTrash]

"Nobody except for other Brits have ever moaned about people using AE to get cheap healthcare, because if you look at it, it isn't that cheap."

I'm not moaning about it, just saying that it happens and I'm surprised the loophole has been left there. CIPAV certainly moans about AEs not paying enough contributions, to the extent that they've been refusing to allocate AEs their rightful pension entitlement.

If you set up an AE, declare 20€ turnover every other quarter and pay 10€ contributions a year, I'd call that cheap healthcare, wouldn't you?

The level of turnover at which you're better off on another régime depends entirely on overheads as a proportion of turnover, which varies a lot from business to business. There is a built in percentage abattement for each category, for prof lib it's 34% if I remember correctly, so as long as your overheads are below that figure, AE is better, and once they start going above that figure, it's not. There's an online calculator on the apce site (I think) where you can put in the figures and it does a simulation of what charges you'd pay on each of a number of régimes, but I daren't post another link after what happened last time!

[lindal1000]

You only get pension credits with AE if you declare a rate equivalent to the minimum wage..but that said, there is now an option to opt into the pension with a minimum contribution.

It's not like you have a choice about whether your AE covers your healthcare though. I wanted to work and registering as a AE was the only way I could do it legitimately. I could have got my healthcare via OH and then I would have paid nothing for the privilege.

[EuroTrash]

"You only get pension credits with AE if you declare a rate equivalent to the minimum wage..but that said, there is now an option to opt into the pension with a minimum contribution."

Are you sure that minimum wage is the criterion? For prof lib I think you are supposed to get credited with a trimestre if your turnover is for that trimestre reaches about 3000€. An average of 1000€ in turnover per month, minus the abattement, must surely be a whole lot less than minimum wage.

"It's not like you have a choice about whether your AE covers your healthcare though. I wanted to work and registering as a AE was the only way I could do it legitimately. I could have got my healthcare via OH and then I would have paid nothing for the privilege."

I don't get the logic in that. You can only get your healthcare as an ayant droit if you're not working. As soon as you start work, no matter what regime you are under or whether you are employed, you stop being an ayant droit and start paying your own contributions.