Proposition 53K2938

Projet de loi portant réforme du calcul des cotisations sociales pour les travailleurs indépendants.

General information ¶

Submitted by

PS | SP the Di Rupo government

Submission date

July 9, 2013

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

social-security contribution social security self-employed person

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP Open Vld N-VA LDD MR VB

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

Oct. 8, 2013 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Minister, Mr. Ministers, Ladies and Gentlemen, in the Economy Committee, we voted the bill on the reform of the system of calculation of social contributions of independent workers, proposed by Minister Sabine Laruelle.

It was crucial to review this 1967 calculation system for several reasons: the income of self-employed workers can vary greatly, careers are currently often mixed and periods of economic crisis are a reality – the latest figures on the number of bankruptcies confirm this – and dismissal requests are on the rise. In short, it was time to address this issue and set up a new mechanism for calculating social contributions that is not only based on the year N-3 but that takes into account the professional income of the same year.

So this is done and I thank the Minister for having carried out this work of consultation and reflection that allowed to result in a text that will be applicable from January 2015, time necessary to allow the transition between the two systems, the current and new content of the bill.

Note that the new calculation system is more just, in connection with the economic reality of the independent. It is also simpler and corrects the shortcomings of the current system, in particular with regard to the start of the career of the self-employed where the income of the first three years serves twice as reference income. Similarly, at the end of the career, the self-employed who wish to reduce their workload is currently forced to pay high contributions. When the employee ceases to operate, the last three years of activity do not serve as the basis for any year of contribution. This will no longer be the case: each year will be taken into account.

This new calculation system is more flexible and allows adjustments of the social contribution proposed by the Social Insurance Fund, thus avoiding even the fact of bringing the self-employed into a problematic financial situation. Indeed, if the income of the self-employed is decreasing, after the agreement of his social insurance fund, the self-employed will therefore have the possibility to pay provisional contributions lower than those initially proposed. Similarly, if the income is rising, the self-employed will be able to pay more than the proposed contributions, a regularization taking place from the knowledge of the actual income.

This reform meets the expectations of the independent workers because the method of calculation is in line with the economic reality. The members of the Economy committee understood this well since this bill was adopted unanimously, which is a rather rare fact. Our group hopes it will be the same on Thursday, at the vote in the plenary session.

The calculation of the social contributions for self-employed is a very old one. The present draft law is therefore ⁇ important for those who do business in this country, for our self-employed and entrepreneurs.

The draft law changes the method of calculating the social contributions to be paid quarterly. It modifies them in such a way that one wants to obtain a closer connection to the N-3. So one wants to go back to three years, rather than to a N-1.

Entrepreneurs have the option of choosing between three systems.

A first option is a quarterly contribution calculated on the basis of the professional income, as known on 1 January N-3. The person concerned may pay a higher amount, but may also pay a lower amount, if the consent of the RSVZ is obtained. As soon as the professional income is known, a regularization follows.

Already in December 2012, I and Ms. Demir submitted a similar proposal. It concerned a proposal to empower our companies and entrepreneurs, a proposal for greater transparency and to get a better connection to the income, according to the year in which the income is acquired. In such a year-on-year system, the self-employed person immediately pays the social contributions, which are calculated on the basis of an estimate of the income of the year.

This system is connected to the year-on-year system, but is not similar. Not sad, however, it is all in all a significant improvement of what was.

Nevertheless, we have some comments.

First, we believe that the introduction of this law on 1 January 2015 constitutes a fairly long transitional period.

Second, the RSVZ must determine whether or not someone can pay less. However, the RSVZ often finds itself in financial need. Will they be willing to allow this reduction?

Third, there is a transitional period for those who are retired. They are subject to a special exemption regime. However, what do we do with unexpected stops, for example from someone who gets sick and needs to stop his business?

Fourth, an evaluation is also provided after four years, which seems to us to be a long term.

The present draft amends the existing system in a significant way. We can find ourselves in it. We believe that this is an important step in the right direction.

Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Minister, dear colleagues, my group is pleased to have fully participated in the development of this new way of calculating the social contributions of independent workers.

In 2007, the Socialist Party submitted to the Federal Parliament a bill aimed at simplifying the calculation of social contributions for self-employed workers. Specifically, the PS proposed that the self-employed person who wishes to pay their social contributions in advance during the year during which the income is collected. This system had the advantage of allowing the self-employed who wishes to avoid potentially heavy recoveries after three years, in accordance with the current procedure. This would allow him to pay his contributions based on his immediate professional income.

At the time, we had chosen to maintain the so-called N-3 system. Our choice was then based on the opinion of the General Management Committee, which believed that a N/N system was, at the time, not technically feasible because it was no longer based on knowledge of income. However, the Committee considered that it would indeed be desirable that the calculation of contributions be shortened, or even based on the income of that same year. The proposal was also motivated by a purely budgetary contingency, namely to avoid a consequential decrease in the revenues of social contributions from the social security scheme for self-employed workers. This was clearly confirmed in the final report of the Monitoring Committee, which estimated the income deficit at 330 million for the first two years of the reform.

Subsequently, we were very cautious about the positive impact of the N/N model, which did not exclude irrational behaviors by which independent employees would wrongfully limit their provisional payment very strongly, thus putting themselves in difficulty at the time of the final settlement, critical which is also included in the final report of the Monitoring Committee. It is therefore a hybrid solution that has been chosen, a unique method of calculation according to which the contributions of each year are calculated on the basis of the income of the same year and payable provisionally according to the income of the year N-3 with the possibility of anticipating the increase of its income and therefore of its social contributions.

The third way, the solution unanimously adopted by the Monitoring Committee, is thus the synthesis, the one that takes the best of the two proposals in order to best respond to the legitimate requests of independent workers while avoiding budgetary risks.

This solution avoids the many flaws in the initial proposals, those concerning the method of calculation N-3, but also the version N/N which had a significant budgetary impact and which would create instability in the estimation of the amounts of contributions in the head of the independent, but also a risk in the level of revenue received.

The proposal presented to us at the vote finally responds to a common concern for all those who have tried to come up with a solution: to give the self-employed a system of social contributions in line with the economic realities they live in daily life and that is, I think, a mission accomplished.

For many years, self-employed workers have wanted their social contributions to be calculated on the basis of the income of the current year rather than on the income of the previous three years, since the activities and revenues they obtain from them are sometimes very variable. Therefore, they sometimes have to pay too large contributions and do not know how to assume them with their turnover.

Ecolo-Groen had submitted a bill in September 2011. It proposed a system for calculating contributions on the annual income. Your bill translates the same objectives in a different way.

Your bill receives approval, as it results from consultations and technical work carried out with independent representatives. Therefore, it can be estimated that it meets their concerns and that it will allow to modernize and improve this system of calculation of social contributions. This is why Ecolo-Groen will obviously support this bill.

Nevertheless, I would like to draw attention and, in any case, tell you that we wish to remain partners in the process, in the development, in the future realization of these provisions. Indeed, there is an interesting element in your project and in the mechanisms set up: one that aims to maintain the budgetary and financial neutrality of the social security of independent workers, and therefore a concern for the amount of contributions due to be actually paid.

That is why – in any case, this is my interpretation – floor contributions setting benchmarks allowing the independent to locate and evaluate the corresponding contributions were established. These floor values can vary over time, depending on the realisation and progress of the process. It follows that the self-employed who has lower incomes and who wish to pay lower contributions cannot do so automatically but must apply for the approval of his social insurance fund.

This system is cautious. At the same time, it will be necessary to ensure that these boxes are listening to the independent. I think they are fundamentally concerned with ⁇ ining a budgetary balance and avoiding the independent from finding themselves in cumulative difficulties. These fears could, however, hinder and effectively prevent the enforcement of the law.

It is therefore important, in my opinion, to look after this application and to check the evolution of the income of the independent who requested a reduction of his contribution and this, so that he does not find himself in a situation of underpayment and must therefore assume delays and the related penalties.

The evaluation of the mechanism is provided for in the law. It will really need to be ensured that it takes place in consultation with the speakers and the Parliament. This will allow us to examine the relevance of the measures implemented and their possible adaptation.

Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that all political leaders sought to ⁇ the same goal: allowing the independent to adapt the amount of his social contributions to the economic reality experienced. Different pistes were on the table and the one that is proposed today is the result of a very broad consultation with independent organizations as well as with social insurance funds. In consultation with all partners, we are preparing a circular to objectivize the conditions under which an independent can benefit from a reduction; we want to be sure that an independent in Antwerp is treated in the same way as an independent in Arlon.

As for the implementation of this project, politically, I would have preferred it to take place on January 1, 2014 because you do not ignore that a fairly important event will take place in May 2014.

I have a thorough analysis of the Association of Social Insurance Funds for Self-employed (VSVZ) stating that it is not possible to have the reform initiated as early as 1 January 2014. Since it must take place on 1 January, it will take place on 1 January 2015. I find it too late, but computer science may not be ready before January 1, 2014, and I don’t want bugs.

I do not want to initiate a reform and then have problems in implementing it. In terms of assessment, four years may seem like a lot, but it will never be more than three regularization exercises. The implementation is scheduled for 2015 and the first regularisation year will take place in 2017. We wanted to have at least two to three regularization exercises. So, if there are apparent malfunctions before, we will be able to adjust the system.

I note that for pensioners there is a transitional arrangement, an exceptional regime, but not for someone who has to stop his case unexpectedly, for whatever reason.

If the activity is discontinued, contributions will be due for the months provided, which is quite logical. In the event of bankruptcy, there will be priority beneficiaries. It is well known that social insurance funds are one of the primary beneficiaries in the event of bankruptcy. Of course, transitional circumstances cannot be envisaged for all situations.

With regard to pensioners, the situation is a little different. In the event of a break, if you work for three months, you will be paid a social contribution for three months. This is what this reform will enable.