The document discusses the current state of the European coordination of social security schemes. [1] Key achievements since the 2010 entry into force of Regulation 883/2004 are noted, but many problems and open questions remain. [2] Issues include missing forms, interpretation questions, and ensuring national systems are compatible with the EESSI digital exchange system. [3] Further amendments may be needed to address issues like long-term care, simultaneous activities, and the interaction between EU regulations and directives.
Draft version (still under revision) of the presentation used during the 2015 TRN Conference in Hull (UK). The paper delivered is available on academia.edu network
This presentation was delivered during the “go-home-meeting” hosted by Pharmakon on Sept 9th, 2020. We shared our insights and thoughts on the impact of Brexit on medicinal products – in the pre-and post-approval phase, from the EU and the UK perspective.
This presentation was delivered during the “go-home-meeting” hosted by Pharmakon on Sept 9th, 2020. We shared our insights and thoughts on the impact of Brexit on medicinal products – in the pre-and post-approval phase, from the EU and the UK perspective.
Draft version (still under revision) of the presentation used during the 2015 TRN Conference in Hull (UK). The paper delivered is available on academia.edu network
This presentation was delivered during the “go-home-meeting” hosted by Pharmakon on Sept 9th, 2020. We shared our insights and thoughts on the impact of Brexit on medicinal products – in the pre-and post-approval phase, from the EU and the UK perspective.
This presentation was delivered during the “go-home-meeting” hosted by Pharmakon on Sept 9th, 2020. We shared our insights and thoughts on the impact of Brexit on medicinal products – in the pre-and post-approval phase, from the EU and the UK perspective.
2010 - Întâmpinarea Regulamentelor (CE) nr. 883/2004 şi nr. 987/2009 de către...
2010 - Where do we stand – what problems do we have?
1. organising training and setting up networks on the
European Coordination of Social Security Schemes
in the 27 Member States
National trESS Seminar
European Co-ordination of social
security
Where do we stand – what problems
do we have?
Lund 14.10.2010
Bernhard Spiegel
2. Where do we stand? – Short inventory
•Around 1.5.2010
–What has been achieved? What is missing?
•Other developments
–Treaty of Lisbon
–Association Agreements
•Preview
–What are (could be) the next steps?
Bernhard Spiegel
3. 1.5.2010 – Entry into force of Reg. 883/2004
• Formalistic problems (survival of Reg. 1408/71):
– Reg. on Third Country Nationals
• Reg. 1408/71 for UK for eternity
– EEA-Agreement
– EU-Swiss Agreement
• Reg. 1408/71 for DK and UK for eternity - see later
• Other problems:
– Transition
• Concrete question: Procedures which began already before 1.5.
– Art. 87 (8) – applicable legislation
• „change of the relevant situation“
• E.g. new employer?
– Information for citizens
Bernhard Spiegel
4. Important achievements
– Implementing Reg. (Reg. 987/2009 + 1.
Amendment Reg. 988/2009)
– Important Decisions of the AC
• E.g. Decision No. A2 on posting
– „Portable“ Documents (all languages - fill able)
– Many paper SEDs
– Master Directory was available on 1.5.2010
• Recommendation: Test and test again!
• Strange results e.g. „Scheme for all“ (Code 23097)
Bernhard Spiegel
5. What is still open?
• Missing SEDs
– Disappointment because of missing communication
between Technique and Law (e.g. BF pensions)
• National adaptations for EESSI
– Reference Implementation necessary
• Additional national amendments to legislation (?)
– Is it allowed or necessary?
• E.g. concerning competences (previous Annexes to Reg. 574/72)
• E.g. concerning health care contributions from foreign pensions
(AT experience)
• Questions of interpretation not solved – see later
Bernhard Spiegel
6. Other related issues
• Entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty
– New voting (qualified majority – Art. 48 TFEU)
• Free movement of EU citizens (Art. 21 TFEU) –
Unanimity – irrelevant?
• AT and DE overruled TCN-Reg.
– Problems with TCN (Art 79 (2) TFEU)
• Association Agreements need for „intra community“
legal base – problems for DK/UK/IE
• EEA-Agreement (Art. 48 TFEU) and EU-Swiss Agreement
(Art. 79 (2) TFEU)?
Bernhard Spiegel
7. Open questions of interpretation - 1
• Value of insurance periods
• Periods for entitlement and/or calculation
• Differences due to national legislation!
• E.g. MS A entitlement: 15 Years; school periods only for
calculation
• MS B entitlement 30 Years; all periods (also school periods)
count for entitlement
• Results which are not justifiable
• Better solution: Assimilation of facts
• Borderline in grey zone: Taboo: periods of residence
disregarded under Bismarckian scheme
Bernhard Spiegel
8. Open questions of interpretation - 2
Family benefits:
• See also case study
• Calculation per child or per family?
• Could lead o different results
• One or two baskets?
• Family allowances and/or parental benefits?
• Period could be decided by beneficiary
• Shorter higher amount or longer lower amount
• Benefit with income replacement function
• Only with foreign income? Case C-257/10, Bergström
• Application of the Judgement in C-363/08, Slanina?
• Do all MS grant family benefits even in cases of divorced
couples where no alimony is paid?
• Repercussions in MS of residence of the children!
Bernhard Spiegel
9. Open questions of interpretation - 3
Reimbursement for unemployment benefits
No problem for insured persons
• But: dispute between institutions
• Amount to which entitlement would exist (with or
without aggregation?)
• 3 months of reimbursement also after very short
periods of employment?
Bernhard Spiegel
10. ECJ always dangerous
Many unresolved questions due to ECJ decisions
• No transposition in Reg. 883/2004
• Case C-205/05, Nemec – is this a common
principle of calculation?
• Case C-352/06, Bosmann – simultaneous
competence of 2 MS?
• Case C-211/08, Cion. against ES – No free
movement of services in case of urgent necessary
care
• Case C-208/07, Chamier-Glisczinski – relief for LTC
benefits? – no! Pending case C-388/09, da Silva
Martins
Bernhard Spiegel
11. Possible future steps?
Amendments to Reg. 883/2004:
• „Rectifications“ – getting rid of mistakes (e.g.
Art. 6 Reg. 987/2009)
• Changes concerning simultaneous activities?
• Intra group mobility (Report of trESS Think Tank)
• „hyper mobile“ Workers (e.g. persons engaged in
sport, musicians, artists)
• Transport workers
• aircrews
Bernhard Spiegel
12. Amendments to Reg. 883/2004 in the future
Special chapter for Long Term Care benefits?
• Is it already too late?
• No – ECJ accepted also amendments (no-export) for
non-contributory benefits
• But – what principles?
Activating measures
• Export + administrative aid?
• No Export if there are no such activating measures in
MS of residence?
Transposition of Patient mobility in Reg. 883/2004?
• Despite coming Directive?
Interference between Reg. 883/2004 and Dir. 2004/38
concerning residence of EU citizens (trESS Think Tank
Report)
Bernhard Spiegel
13. Future of EESSI
When will EESSI be operational?
• will MS be EESSI enabled before end of transition
period?
• Individual testing before „EESSI-enabled“?
Next steps:
• On-line Functionality
• eEHIC
• Data repository of EHICs which lost validity?
• „European Free Movement Card“
• Applicable legislation
• Data repository for A1 forms
• What happens now – Art. 16 procedures?
• Electronic Identification
• Speeding up of pension procedures
Bernhard Spiegel