cryptocurrency news

Health insurance: More contribution for those with statutory health insurance?

It may just be a perfidious political game – but an extremely risky one. In view of the foreseeable gaps in the billions in statutory health and long-term care insurance, a debate has broken out about raising the contribution assessment ceiling. Insured persons would have to pay health insurance contributions on significantly higher incomes than before. It makes sense to discuss a significant increase, said SPD politician Dagmar Schmidt to the “Handelsblatt”. She is, after all, deputy chairwoman of the parliamentary group.

The requirement is not entirely new. The Greens also support such a move, as does the Left Party. The politicians have the idea of ​​raising the assessment limit for health insurance from the current 4,987.50 euros per month to a maximum of 7,300 euros. This value already applies to statutory pension insurance in the old federal states. High earners would quickly cost 220 euros more every month, only as an employee share!

The step may seem tempting to social politicians: billions will be added. Only higher earners and their employers would have to pay for this. And yet the mind games alone are risky. Because they hide the harmful side effects. Employers would have to accept a massive increase in non-wage labor costs – after all, they would have to bear half of the increase for employees. In the event of wage increases, skilled workers would have to pay an even higher share to the state and social security funds, which is not only inimical to performance, but could also be extremely damaging to the economy given the rampant shortage of skilled workers. The fact that tax rates increase with income means that the tax rate rises quickly.

Also read: Significantly rising social security contributions can be a motive for emigrating

The parallel drawn by the social politicians with the higher assessment limit in pension insurance is misleading anyway. Both systems cannot be compared. For example, contributors to pension insurance acquire higher entitlements the more they pay in. Those who earn well pay more, but also secure a higher pension. In health and long-term care insurance, on the other hand, the assessment limit only determines the maximum contribution amount, but has no relevance for the individual benefits.

Back to statutory insurance: Finally out of private health insurance – these six strategies will help you get out

Back to statutory insurance

Finally out of private health insurance – these six strategies will help you get out

Insured persons can often switch from private health insurance to statutory health insurance. If it is not possible to change immediately, special strategies are required – for example for insured persons aged 55 and over.

by Martin Gerth

So the only justification for a higher assessment limit in health and long-term care insurance is actually the idea of ​​solidarity. In a community system, everyone should participate in the financing, according to their ability to perform. In principle, this could even speak against any assessment limit. However, high earners would then have a strong incentive to get out of the system. Even with the current assessment limit, they pay in a total of well over 900 euros a month as an employer and employee share – more than, for example, most people with private health insurance pay.

In order to block this escape option to private health insurance, the compulsory insurance limit would have to be raised at the same time. The path to private health insurance would then only remain open to absolute top earners. However, due to the lack of new members, the PKV would have massive problems and would become increasingly old, an existential threat for them.

Perhaps that is the ulterior motive of the current initiatives: With the threat of abolishing dual health insurance consisting of statutory health insurance and private health insurance through the back door, left-wing social politicians want to get Federal Finance Minister Christian Lindner (FDP) to fill the gaps in the health system with taxpayers’ money. They simply accept that they are likely to unsettle many specialists. A left number!

This article comes from the WiWo newsletter Daily Punch. The newsletter delivers the daily comments from the WiWo editorial team to your inbox. Always to the point, always with punch. Also in the punch: an overview of the five most important topics of the day. You can subscribe to the newsletter here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker