A merry Christmas (not!) from URSAAF.

[Chancer]

A word of warning for those of you who were paying CMU cotisations until this year, you will probably know that the CMU changed to PUMA this year and that there were to be no cotisations payable this year for 2016, some postings have already been made querying why their deductions stopped.

You didn't really think they were going to be that generous did you?  :cry:

I got a letter today informing me that a deduction for the whole year will be made this month, if you already know then my apologies, if you dont then read on.

A précis is that they say there are no contributions payable for 2016 however within the envelope of the new regulations everyone who benefits must contribute according to their situation and resources, this is the retrospective sneaking in of the "cotisation subsidaire" a bit like the second round of backdated EDF bills which you should also get before christmas.

The next part in the original text:

Vous releviez de l'assurance maladie française en 2016 du fait de la stabilité de votre résidence en France, sans avoir néanmoins été amené à cotiser à la sécurité sociale au titre d'une activité professionnelle ou à percevoir une pension de retraite d'une telle activité passée. Par consequent, selon le niveau de vos revenus, vous serez susceptible d'être redevable d'une cotisation subsidiaire maladie.

It then goes on to say the sum due will be calculated from the figures submitted in your tax return, you will be sent the bill in november and have 30 days to pay, you can ask for the payments to be spread which will be considered by their teams.

So its money that you would have paid anyway but many were led to believe would not be charged this year, best to set some money aside from what would be blown at Christmas for this and also the second round of "we want more money from you" factures from EDF.

[Daft Doctor]

Got the same letter today. I was an 'ayant droit' on my wife's healthcare, but not only will I be paying into PUMa as of this month, but my wife will also, as her AE earnings are below the necessary threshold for exoneration. I knew it was coming of course, and the principle behind it is entirely reasonable, but the suddenness of the change and impending payment demand is a bit of a surprise. It won't be a fortune, nothing like private healthcare would have cost, though a bit more notice of when the change was happening for us would have been welcome. Happy Xmas, as you say........

[Chancer]

My sentiments exactly!

 

I just hope it is not going to hit someone hard who is already suffering hard times, when i was very coung, cash strapped and barely able to keep a roof above my head about a debit for car insurance went through at £7.50 instead of £70.50, I informed the broker who had been paid the correct amount then told the bank because I really could not have them taking the money without warning later on, nowadays I would just keep it, they said theer was no mistake, they did not make mistakes, it was my money, I should spend it, their reply to what about if later on you decide you did make a mistake and take it back was "dont worry that wont happen!"

 

You can guess the rest! B'stewards took it without notice just before Christmas and then clobbered me with fines and overdrawn fees and interest etc.

 

Be interesting to see how quick they are to come after the money or whether they will just take it from those who were already mensualisé.

[St Bernard]

I am officially retired ie I have an S1 form and as far as I am aware the UK is responsible for my health care contributions - thus, I had to get my EHIC from the UK. Will I still be liable for this cotisation subsidiaire?

[Chancer]

Wait and see, having re-read it at length I think I can now see the logic behind what seemed to be the illogical ease of entry into PUMA compared to the requirements of the CMU.

 

Everyone in France now has the protection of PUMA, it is universal hence the 'U' whether they want it or otherwise, inclusion is automatic after 3 months of residency you do not even have to apply, if they are not paying for it through cotisations from employment or a retirement pension, and if they have the means then they will be redevable for the cotisation subsidiaire.

 

They have started with the inactifs, the ayant droits and also the frontalières I have just learned, I believe they will also go after those with private medical insurance and S1 holders and maybe even second home owners who stay more than 3 months.

 

Time will tell.

 

The S1 holders must have been expecting this anyway post Brexit.

[Chancer]

Its a long and carefully worded letter which with my eyes I cannot repeat in its entirety nor translate, hopefully a copy will be on line soon.

 

Cherry picking the 2 relevant paragraphs that I base my supposition on are:

 

Toutes les personnes travaillant ou résidant en France de manière stable et régulière ont droit, de façon continue, à la prise en charge de leurs frais de santé blah blah blah, cette nouvelle protection social est le droit, sans qu'aucune démarche ne soit nécessaire  de la part des assurés.

 

AND:

 

Tout assuré bénéficiaire de la prise en charge des frais de santé est amené à contribuer au financement de l'assurance maladie en fonction de sa situation et de ses ressources.

 

My translation/interpretation: Everyone has the "right" without doing anything. Everyone with the right must contribute according to their means.

 

If they are not paying the cotisation through employment or a retirement pension or AE then they will be asked to  pay the subsidiary cotisation of 8% of their RFR above €9K

 

Then there is the question of "benefitting from the right" which will be the challenge from those with private health insurance.

[EuroTrash]

I don't think it's intended to be threatening, or bully anyone into joining PUMA if they don't want, or anything sinister. I think the essence is that legally speaking, if you live in France you must have health insurance, and since PUMA is so cheap and accessible they expect virtually everybody to choose this route. So they're writing to everyone who looks as if they might be concerned and inviting them to explain why they're not concerned, if they're not. But if you can show you are covered by private insurance, or an S1, that will be fine, It's not obligatory to join PUMA if you're inactif, but it is obligatory to have some kind of healthcover. The other thing is that for the first time they have set up a system to cross reference cotisations with income, so now they can finally sort out the anomaly introduced by auto entrepreneur where a well-off inactif couple with one of them running a low income hobby business were getting healthcare for the whole family for sixpence.

The ones who may get a shock from the fallout are the Brits with an income over the threshold who have been living here and submitting tax returns but still using their UK EHICs and haven't told DWP they live in France, since they won't be able show suitable alternative healthcare arrangements.

I also wonder whether it will flag up recently-arrived immigrants who haven't been paying any/sufficient cotisations and whose income is below the threshold for legal residence. Obviously French people in that situation, and also EU immigrants who've been here for 5+ years, would be exempt from cotisations subsidiaires so maybe they won't distinguish, but they probably could if they wanted to, now that the mechanism is basically in place.

[suein56]

Chancer wrote :

Wait and see, having re-read it at length I think I can now see the logic behind ...

They have started with the inactifs, the ayant droits and also the frontalières I have just learned, I believe they will also go after those with private medical insurance and S1 holders and maybe even second home owners who stay more than 3 months.

********

OH and I, as inactifs, paid contributions towards our CMU health cover for 9 years in exactly the way you describe i.e. 8% of total income after an allowance of approx 9K€, so that is nothing new. Now we both have S1 cover and the UK pays our costs .. so how can we be asked to pay for what would be a second time .. ?

Or am I misunderstanding you ?

[Chancer]

I think that you are saying that they are being paid twice not that you are being asked to pay twice.

 

They are not inviting people to sign up, they are saying the opposite, without doing anything you have the right to cover through residence, if you are not paying cotisations be it because you have private healthcover or an S1and that you have the means (a RFR over €9k) you are redevable (sorry cannot express that in English, did not want to say "must pay") for the cotisation subsidiaire.

 

They have already informed the frontaliers with S1 forms (who dont pay) that they will be billed for the cotisation subsidiaire.

[Chancer]

[quote user="EuroTrash"]I don't think it's intended to be threatening, or bully anyone into joining PUMA if they don't want, or anything sinister. I think the essence is that legally speaking, if you live in France you must have health insurance, and since PUMA is so cheap and accessible they expect virtually everybody to choose this route. So they're writing to everyone who looks as if they might be concerned and inviting them to explain why they're not concerned, if they're not. But if you can show you are covered by private insurance, or an S1, that will be fine,

 

It absolutely does not say that, its very explicit and quite the opposite, its not inviting people to join, its telling them they have the right to benefit and the devoir to pay for that benefit if they have the means.

 

 The other thing is that for the first time they have set up a system to cross reference cotisations with income, so now they can finally sort out the anomaly introduced by auto entrepreneur where a well-off inactif couple with one of them running a low income hobby business were getting healthcare for the whole family for sixpence.

 

For sure!

Obviously French people in that situation, and also EU immigrants who've been here for 5+ years, would be exempt from cotisations subsidiaires.

 

No there is no distinction, the letter is going out to all concerned be they French nationals (and there are plenty) EU immigrants or worldwide immigrants.

 

 

[/quote]

[Chancer]

It does at the end say to contact them is you dont believe you should pay the cotisation subsidiaire because you are already paying a cotisation through revenus d'activité ou de remplacement that they dont know about, I dont and most S1 holders wont either.

[Doodle]

Sue, this link may make it a bit clearer - I think - well it did for me. We've not had a letter yet but I like to know in advance what we might be in for! Sorry can't make the link live.

https://www.lesfurets.com/mutuelle-sante/guide/un-retraite-peut-il-beneficier-de-la-protection-universelle-maladie-puma

Mrs KG

[EuroTrash]

https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F12859

says very clearly "Si vous êtes citoyen d'un Pays de l'Espace économique européen (EEE) et venez résider en France, vous ne perdez pas vos droits à l'assurance maladie. Vous continuez à être assuré et relevez soit du régime de sécurité sociale de votre pays de provenance, soit du régime de sécurité sociale français" and ttere is a whoe pull down section about S1 holders, so obviously it is an option.

You are right that it doesn't mention private health insurance as an option, it specifies a national health system, either French or another country's.

But I do see a very big difference between having a right and having an obligation. A right is something you claim if you want, like RSA, prime d'emploi CAF benefits etc, but if you don't ask for it they don't make you have it.

The letter also ignores the fact that EU ressortissants inactifs do not in fact have an automatic right to join PUMA, they have to meet the legal residence criteria for the first 5 years of residence. So one way and another I'm not sure it has been 100% thought through. Unless in fact they send different letters and the various texts haven't filtered through onto the internet yet.

[suein56]

From MrsKG's lesfurets link :

Si vous êtes retraité, vous n’avez aucune cotisation subsidiaire maladie à régler.

En tant que retraité, vous pouvez bénéficier de la Protection Universelle Maladie, sous réserve de respecter les critères de résidence. En effet, vous devez résider en France depuis au moins trois mois, puis 6 mois par an.

Which may explain why there seems to be a mini flood of retired US people who are seeking to move to France as they can no longer pay for adequate healthcare in the US when they cease working.

Sue

[Chancer]

I am a bit confused, its not hard!

 

Have you recieved a letter Eurotrash or have you found the full text of the letter on the net? If you recieved a letter what category do you fall under?

 

There may be more than one letter, certainly the one I recieved is completely at odds with the one you appear to be quoting.

 

Editted, the full legal texts for the masochists:

 

Les principes d'éligibilité à cette cotisation ainsi que les modalités de son calcule sont précisés à l'article L. 380-2, R380-3 à R380-8 et D380-1 du code de la sécurité sociale.

[EuroTrash]

Sorry, no I'm not quoting a letter, I'm quoting the french govt website as per the link.

No I haven't received a letter and hopefully I won't (a) because I think I've paid enough cotisations as a micro an (b) because I don't have any other income in any case. I thought you were earning a living wage as a micro too Chancer so how come you had this letter?

Confusion reigns.

[Chancer]

The détails and the character of the letter are definitely at odds with the government websites, I can see now where you were drawing your conclusions of intent from and would until now have agreed with you, the letter changes all that, its a definite change of direction, the frontalières are dismissing it as something sent out in error by a stagaire, I think not, it has been the subject of much consideration, planning and redrafting of the Puma reforms.

 

Macrons team have played a blinder, it will be very well recieved in most quarters.

 

I declare under revenus foncières non professionale BIC which are subject to income tax (which was refunded with a décote), CSG and CRDS but for 2016 no assurance maladie cotisations as they are not revenus d'activité or remplacement, effectively I am inactif so quite rightly should pay the cotisation subsidiare.

 

My early Christmas présents this year (all to be paid or debitted in the next month) are an additional €1406 social charges, an additional €333 taxe d'hab, €500 ish estimated Puma cotisations and EDF are trying it on for the second round of backdated increases on 3 electricity accounts, they can whistle for that one.

 

The shortfalls are despite me being mensualisé for all of them but were expected because my income rose significantly in 2016 compared to 2015.

 

I have a nagging feeling that there is another one as well!

[St Bernard]

If it is the case that S1 holders escape the cotisation subsidiaire (big if), then the reason I received the letter may be that my status altered in 2016 quarter 1 - ie I turned 65 and got the S1.

[Chancer]

I had not realised from your posting that you had recieved the letter, yours will be like a test case.

 

Before for the CSG/CRDS exemption you would write saying that as a holder of an S1 you were not à la charge of the French social security system which is why I believe that the wording has been changed.

 

Dont expect a timely or any other response from the worst organisation in France other then increasing demands for the money.

[EuroTrash]

If you got your S1 part way through the year then you would (subject to your status prior to the S1) be liable for cotisations for the part of the year before the S1 kicked in. The S1 didn't cover you from 1st Jan if you only got it in Feb or March. But it's probable that the system automatically calculates everything as per the situation on 1st Jan because that is how France works, so any changes during the year would have to be handled manually.

[EuroTrash]

Regarding intent, certainly one of the purposes of PUMA was to be a more watertight system and bring in more money by picking up people who were previously slipping through the net. I am not surprised they are tightening up but I still don't think that if someone has a valid S1 or is a frontalier with their paperwork all up to date and in order, they will be double charged, simply because I can't see Macron trying to break EU agreements so blatantly, him being so pro EU and all. But any frontaliers or EU retirees who haven't bothered getting the correct paperwork may well find themselves paying the price. I know there are Brits who live in France and work from home and continue paying NICs and using their EHIC, this would be perfectly OK if they had applied for and been given an A1 portable health document/workers S1 by HMRC but without it, it's not OK.

As you say it remains to be seen, and when the dust has settled we should all be clearer and have more clarity (as TM would say) on how PUMA actually works.

[Chancer]

Not a mistake by a stagaire but a carefully considered reform to raise money, the legislation to allow them to trawl for data was only enacted less than 3 weeks ago, they have harvested the data and are sending out the warning letters to all who have been thrown up by the trawl.

 

https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000035967518&categorieLien=id

 

I would expect the appel des cotisations to arrive equally speedily so those in doubt like S1 holders should know fairly quickly, if they are billed then any challenge will probably take take a lot longer to work through.

[Chancer]

This is the information they have harvested in order to decide who will pay the cotisation/

 

1° Données relatives à l'identité des personnes :

- numéro d'inscription au répertoire national d'identification des personnes physiques (NIR) ;
- civilité ;
- nom de famille ;
- nom d'usage ;
- prénoms ;
- date de naissance ;
- lieu de naissance (code commune INSEE) ;
- adresse de domicile (numéro et nom de voie, nom de commune, code commune INSEE) ;
- adresse de correspondance (numéro et nom de voie, nom de commune, code commune INSEE) ;

2° Données fiscales relatives aux revenus :

- traitements et salaires ;
- pensions, retraites et rentes ;
- revenus et plus-values des professions non salariées : revenus agricoles, revenus industriels et commerciaux professionnels, revenus industriels et commerciaux non professionnels, revenus non commerciaux professionnels, revenus non commerciaux non professionnels ;
- divers : montant net des revenus agricoles, revenus industriels et commerciaux, revenus non commerciaux non soumis aux contributions sociales par les organismes sociaux, indemnités d'élus locaux, revenus étrangers imposables en France, ouvrant droit à un crédit d'impôt égal au montant de l'impôt français ;
- revenus des valeurs et capitaux mobiliers ;
- plus-values et gains divers ;
- revenus fonciers ;
- revenus fonciers exceptionnels ou différés ;
- le cas échéant, rectifications apportées, par le contribuable ou les services de la direction générale des finances publiques, aux mêmes données, en cas d'émission de rôles supplémentaires et de dégrèvements.

[Doodle]

FYI received today - sorry can't make it live. Mrs KG

https://www.french-property.com/news/french_health/puma_cotisations_2017/

[Chancer]

We will see how it plays out.

 

Its a given that it wont be levied on pension income or revenus de patrimoine under the plafond but I have a feeling that holding an S1 will not prevent them from taking the cotisation as a paiement de solidarité for those with investment/rental income over the plafond like any French national or people like Norman.

 

It will no doubt be challenged, it may even be overturned for a while but they will just correct the error (if there is one) like they did with CSG/CRDS otherwise it will be manifestly unfair.