A merry Christmas (not!) from URSAAF.

[Chancer]

wrong thread

[Chancer]

wrong thread

[Daft Doctor]

Our 'appels de cotisation' arrived from URSSAF today. Firstly, the income numbers used bear no relation to the 'revenues du capital et du patromine' for 2016 (as declared by us in 2017). Secondly, they have ignored all Mrs DD's professional income as an AE, which means her cotisation is more than twice what it should be....

Of course we will appeal, but that is yet more time and effort when there are a million other things to be doing before Christmas. Why should it be so difficult to get the basics right? As said before, I don't mind paying, but I do mind being fleeced through carelessness or incompetence.......

[Chancer]

I understand but think we have chosen the wrong country [:D]

 

How did I know that they were going to hold back the "before the end of November" bills till just before Xmas [:P]

 

I've been paying my impôts and taxes by prélèvement automatique, in theory this month should be a free month or one with just a couple of small balancing payments, they took out €1248 and €333 extra yesterday for impôts and taxe d'hab, OK I knew it was coming but that was from the account where La Banque Postale have decided to credit me with €1100 for 2 cheques when they recieved and reciepted €1625 and to not tell me about it, now there will be another €500 I reckon Puma payments before Xmas unless they get it wrong like with you.

[EuroTrash]

DD - don't forget that the figure the tax people take for AE earnings is the taxable income after deducting the expenses allowance, not the turnover figure that you declare. Not sure if the affects anything in this case, but a lot of people forget to take it into account.

[Chancer]

[quote user="EuroTrash"]DD - don't forget that the figure the tax people take for AE earnings is the taxable income after deducting the expenses allowance, not the turnover figure that you declare. [/quote]

 

That would be a reasonable assumption, you can only charge someone on their benefit/profit not turnover right? Wrong, this is France! And this is URSSAF! [:(]

 

AE cotisations (including healthcare) are levied on turnover but the cotisation percentage is lower to take account of this, a normal intelligent person would expect URSSAF to levy their cotisations on the notional profit allowed after the abattement for their regime, but this is after all the most greedy incompetent and uncommunicative organisation in France.

 

So it was no surprise today to recieve my appel de cotisation not for the expected €400 but for €2997 [:(]

 

My 2016 declaration declared €47111 of revenus de capital et patrimoine which were reduced to €13662 on my avis d'impôt for the calculation of my income tax, CSG and CRDS (71% abattement), URSSAF have levied their cotisation on the full €47K less the base figure of 9648 to end up with une assiette retenue of €37463 x 8% = €2997

 

So that is a total of €5000 of unexpected bills to pay just before Xmas, thankfully not a problem to me this year but it will go down like a lead balloon with many, I will pay them what I think I owe and they can do their worst, I will not lose sleep over it.

 

This is going to be a nasty surprise for AE's who have not paid enough according to the PASS calculation.

[EuroTrash]

That doesn't sound right Chancer. I thought that in the example calculations they used the profit figure, as you say, not the turnover figure. Hopefully they have made a mistake.

[Chancer]

I will just pay them the €320 (not €400) that it should be and let them get on with it, their will be plenty of other people to harangue them.

 

Time will tell but is going to be a real blow for many to have to find the money by 19th January, some could have bills of up to €5787 just on gite/CDH income alone let alone investment income which is declared gross anyway.

[Chancer]

[quote user="EuroTrash"]That doesn't sound right Chancer. I thought that in the example calculations they used the profit figure, as you say, not the turnover figure. Hopefully they have made a mistake.[/quote]

 

Interstingly their web page that explains the calculation is now a 404 page not found, have they taken it down or are loads of people having an anxiety attack?

 

I think they know exactly what they are doing and its not by chance that this task has been given to the body who's reputation is already so bad that it cannot be further damaged, by they I mean the government, this is going to bring in loads of money to them.

 

Anyone off the radar who has not submitted a tax return will get a demand for €15691 even if they have no revenues [:-))] Now they really will be having a miserable Xmas!

[Chancer]

Its a mistake, having read through the whole act the key detail is contained in annexe 2

http://circulaires.legifrance.gouv.fr/pdf/2017/11/cir_42757.pdf

Now I bet it will take URSSAF several years of hounding people for money that they dont owe to admit their mistake.

I bet loads of people will just pay up without question, I know if I asked even my most intelligent and worldly wide French friends they would tell me if they say you must pay then you must pay, had this exact scenario many years back and they got really anxious for me when I laughed and said no way!

[Daft Doctor]

For Mrs DD they just ignored her AE turnover (I'm pretty sure that I'm with Chancer on this one, it is turnover that matters, not taxable profit..) completely, putting her down as having zero professional income. As her 2016 turnover places her between 5% and 10% of PASS, she should be entitled to a several hundred euros sizable rebate on her PUMA cotisations.

Today we have written to URSSAF putting our case for recalculation, including tax declarations, AE attestation fiscale, avis d'impôts, the lot! Hopefully a revised demand will ensue, but I'm not holding my breath. After nearly 6 years in France this sort of administrative sh*te gets no easier to live with.....

[EuroTrash]

"her 2016 turnover places her between 5% and 10% of PASS"

So to give her an income of between 1 931 and 3 862, her turnover (if she is on a commercial activity) must have been between 5K and 10K, is that what you're saying?

[Daft Doctor]

Hi EuroTrash, no, her turnover was between those numbers, but as Chancer has already mentioned, for AE's there is usually no allowance for expenses, cost of sales, etc, so I assume that the turnover figure is the one that is relevant. If her revenus professionnels had simply been written down by 71%, I would have expected to see the appropriate figure on the appel de cotisations. As it is, the figure was zero, which makes me think it was just missed or ignored. We will see, you may after all be correct, and if so we will pay around 550 euros more than was expected. Under those circumstances, she might as well shut down the business, as it is a lot of work for a miniscule profit as it stands (mainly due to exorbitant ebay and paypal charges......)

[Chancer]

I reckon most of the URSSAF staff will be going off sick from tomorrow until at least the new year given the countrywide reaction to the Secret Santa letters.

[EuroTrash]

DD, no there is an abattement that is applied to work out your RFR from your turnover.

I am prof lib and my micro is my only income, and if I declare a turnover of around 20k then my RFR is around 13k (the abattement for prof lib is around 30%).

I think what Chancer is saying that they should have applied the abattement to his turnover to work out the cotisations, but they didn't.

[Daft Doctor]

Ah, ok EuroTrash, I understand what you are saying. I'll see what they come back with as a response to my letter if and when they reply), they still overstated our property income by around 3k euros in any case.....

[Debra]

As I've said elsewhere, I don't believe that people with S1 forms or private healthcover are chargeable for these supplementary cotisations because they are not 'a la charge de France'.  If anyone with PHI or an S1 receives a bill they should contest it and send details of their cover.

[Chancer]

[quote user="Daft Doctor"]Ah, ok EuroTrash, I understand what you are saying. I'll see what they come back with as a response to my letter if and when they reply), they still overstated our property income by around 3k euros in any case.....[/quote]

 

If you have declared it under a regime réel then they will add 25% to your declared figure.

 

As ridiculous as it sounds, the whole idea of a micro_BIC is that there is no need for an accountant, you simply declare your gross and net incomes, however if you do not use a French compatble from a Centre Agrée they will penalise you by adding 25% to your declared figures, basically saying that you must be hiding  one Euro for every 4 that you declare. This mythical income will be subject to impôts sur le revenu, CSG/CRDS and now PUMA cotisations.

 

A French friend was going to use the regime réel, I told him this and he said I was crazy, I must have got it wrong, they coudn't and wouldn't do that, next time I saw him he was incandescent with rage because he had found out it was so.

 

He will have got his appel de cotisations today so I expect him to beat a path to my door tomorrow.

[Daft Doctor]

Well, after sending my RAR letter off the URSAFF on 20th December with supporting documents appealing against their calculation of our PUMA cotisations, guess what.............nothing. With 8 days to go until payment is due, I'm still waiting, but I suppose it is no surprise.

It has however just become evident to me why their figures are so wrong. Not only have they declined to reduce Mrs DD's cotisations on account of her Micro-Entreprise (AKA AE) turnover in 2016, they have actually included her turnover as part of the 'assiette' to be charged at 8% as property and investment income!! The numbers match up exactly, as they have overstated this category of income by exactly the amount of AE turnover. I know from discussions above that there may not be a proportional reduction in Mrs DD's PUMA cotisations due if it is perceived AE profit and not turnover that is considered, but to negligently include it in with the other income is a disgrace.

If I haven't had a revised figure from them by early next week, I'll be sending them only what I think I owe them, with a clearly worded letter explaining why. Quite clearly a bunch of complete muppets..........

[Chancer]

I sent them a letter containing a copy of the legislation explaining how the assiette is to be calculated, my (I believe) correct calculation and a cheque for the (I believe) correct amount which was cashed yesterday, I am going to give them till the end of the month to respond although I dont expect them to before going to phase 1 of the contestation which is the commission de recours amiable at the end of January I will have a further 2 weeks to do so, its very important to respect the délais for anything to be recevable, everything is stacked against the innocent individual 

 

I dont expect any response and fully expect to have to go to the second stage and for them in the meantime to just go ahead with a recouvrement forcé and to block my bank account, such is the way of URSSAF.

 

The following is the letter I wrote for what its worth, I  had no help with it and know there will be spelling and puctuation errors, perhaps even conveying the wrong meaning but I have found in the past that its actually and aid to my negotiations by confusing the other party, not that anyone will even read it on its way to the poubelle.

 

Monsieur/Madame.

 

Je vous écris pour contester le montant dû sur l'appel de cotisation que je viens de recevoir.

 

Mes revenus du capital et du patrimoine de 2016 était déclaré sous le cadre déclaratif 5NG (2042C pro) et l'abattement forfaitaire de 71% aurait été déduite du revenu déclaré et donc n'entrant pas dans l'assiette de la cotisation subsidiaire maladie.

 

Par conséquence le revenu imposable devrait être €XYZ comme le revenu brut global retenu dans mon avis d'impôt.

 

Je calcule que je dois une cotisation de €ABC et vous trouverez un cheque ci-joint pour cet montant.

 

Then I wrote out the correct calculation for the cotisation 

 

Je vous demande une réponse avant le fin de Janvier afin d'éviter que je procède avec un recours contentieux auprès la commission de recours amiable.

 

Veuillez accepter. Messieurs, mes salutations distinguées.

 

Chancer.

 

The salutaions always stick in my throat [:(]

[Chancer]

DaftDoctor.

 

What box number was your wifes AE earnings declared under?

 

Were the AE earnings and3 other revenus d'activité higher than €1931/€3862? - double that for joint déclaration.

[Daft Doctor]

Hi Chancer, AE turnover was declared in box 5UA on 2042C PRO, so no excuses for them lumping it in with property and investment income. The amount declared was above the 1,931 euro lower threshold, and was clearly Mrs DD's as it was in the column for 'Déclarant 2'. I have since forwarded with my letter her 'Attestation Fiscale AE' for 2016, as well as the relevant tax declarations and Avis d'Impôt.

I was interested to read your comments about timescales for challenging their assertions and going to a formal contestation. I guess I'll have to mention something about that when I send them the cheques for our cotisations next week, along with (as you have done) a breakdown of how for each of us our assiette and therefore cotisations should be calculated.

[Chancer]

I have probably already linked to this PDF in the thread but will do so again because it really contains everything you need to understand what you should owe, how they should calculate it and what you need to do to contest it especially the timescales which are there to screw you over as many have found.

 

http://circulaires.legifrance.gouv.fr/pdf/2017/11/cir_42757.pdf

 

Last page before the annexes:

 

Le redevable qui souhaite par la suite engager un recours contentieux à l’encontre du montant de la cotisation forfaitaire qui lui a été notifiée par une URSSAF doit au préalable saisir la commission de recours amiable (CRA) de cet organisme avant d’engager une éventuelle procédure judiciaire devant le tribunal des affaires de sécurité sociale (TASS) dans le ressort duquel se trouve son domicile, conformément aux dispositions des articles R. 142-1 et R. 142-18 du code de la sécurité sociale. À défaut, il s’expose à ce qu’une fin de non-recevoir lui soit opposée par le TASS.

Ce recours amiable doit être porté devant la CRA dans le délai de deux mois à compter de la réception de l’appel de cotisation contestée. En cas de rejet, le cotisant qui souhaite poursuivre sa contestation devant la juridiction compétente dispose, en application des articles R. 142-6 et R. 142-18 du code de la sécurité sociale, d’un délai de 2 mois suivant la notification de la décision explicite de la CRA pour former une requête devant le TASS. Lorsque la décision de la commission n’a pas été portée à la connaissance du requérant dans le délai d’un mois, l’intéressé peut considérer sa demande comme rejetée. Dans ce cas, il peut également saisir le TASS dans les deux mois suivant la date de la décision implicite de rejet.

 

The annexes show what revenues they can impose the cotisation against and what abattements they should apply. Shame they never got around to reading it [:(]

[Daft Doctor]

Thanks Chancer, that is hugely helpful.

[Daft Doctor]

Ok, so, as predicted, by yesterday morning I'd not had a reply from URSSAF. I therefore wrote again and sent them the following:

1. Letter pointing out their mistakes and the lack of a reply to previous letter;

2. My own calculations of cotisations due for both myself and Mrs DD;

3. Cheques for both cotisations in line with my calculations;

4. A request for either agreement with my calculations or, if not, an explanation as to why not?

5. A desire for early clarity on the matter to avoid the need to contact the commission de recours amiable.

Let's see what happens, and whether they try to impose any penalties for 'underpayment'. Will keep you posted......