2023-11-30 13:16:00
Contestation
But now, “JD” contested his “compulsory” submission – and therefore what he had to pay – to the National Social Insurance Institute for Self-Employed Workers (INASTI) as well as to its social insurance fund (ACERTA) before the French-speaking court of Brussels, arguing that he had already contributed, throughout his entire career, to the health insurance scheme common to the institutions of the Union (RCAM). Unable to resolve the dispute, the Brussels court therefore referred the question to the CJEU. And the response of the European Court, supporting case lawis clear: due to the “privileges and immunities of the European Union and [d] “JD”, even retired, was effectively exempt from the contributions claimed by the Belgian State. Worse: the scope of this judgment is rather broad, which means that European civil servants, whether they are employees, self-employed or retired, simply cannot be subject to Belgian social security.
Pending cases
On the side of INASTI, taken to court by “JD” (just like ACERTA and… the Belgian State), we do not know how many European civil servants are in this situation. Questioned by L’Avenir, the institute mentioned five similar (pending) cases. Specifically concerning the “JD” case, whose judgment is embarrassing to say the least, INASTI indicates that it is “under analysis” and does not comment on “its scope and consequences”. It is also indicated that it is the (French-speaking) court of Brussels which “will now have to rule on the merits of this dispute”, this time taking into account the (binding) judgment of the CJEU.
The NSSO concerned
However, the challenge is (potentially) significant for INASTI, and more generally for the National Social Security Office (ONSS), which received a letter from a European official in the wake of the ruling a priori concerned by the exemption formulated by the CJEU. A sign that the noise is starting to spread…
“Any person who is completely or partially subject to the common system of the European institution and who besides that exercises a professional activity in Belgium is only subject to the European system”, summarizes Bruno de Pauw, legal expert attached to the department of international relations of the NSSO. “The result of this reasoning is a total exemption from social contributions and an exemption from the principle of national solidarity, even while being active in an activity which has nothing to do with the European Union,” laments the latter. If, legally, he finds nothing wrong with it, “morally, it is quite shocking. People already earn a good living as European civil servants and find themselves in a very advantageous situation, since they can carry out another activity while being exempt from contributions….”
Asked regarding the potential financial consequences for Belgian social security, the expert said he was not “worried”. But admits to being in the dark: “Unfortunately, we have no idea whether ten people, or 5,000 people are affected. We do not have any data since nothing is declared to us. We expect people to ask for reimbursement, but in what proportion?”
1701357709
#Belgian #social #security #caught #Court #Justice #European #Union
