For each child an allowance. This principle applies for ten years now. Fully implemented, however, only in 2013, as well as the self-employed were children are entitled to family allowances. For the Affected, such as the self-employed hairdresser and a single mother, Claudia Byland from Bern, this brought a noticeable improvement. You must no longer walk as before about the father of her son, in order to get the allowances.
last February, but Byland received a strange Letter from the AHV compensation Fund. In it, you have to pay back the allowances for the year 2017. Because in that year, not you, but the father of the child have been entitled to it. How is that possible?
in 2017, had opened Claudia Byland a new business and has made extensive investments. As a self-employed, you could deduct those investments in the case of the taxes, making your tax-reduced income significantly. It fell under the minimum, according to the act on family allowances is necessary in order to be considered as employed. This minimum corresponds to the half of the annual amount of a minimum full AHV pension as of 2017, the 7050 Swiss francs. As Byland has not reached this amount in your taxable income, it was classified retrospectively for 2017, as a non-working.
Now non-active persons will have allowances to claim on family. But if the other parent is employed, and the necessary minimum is reached, is this. It's the law: It defines who can claim under what conditions the family allowance. In practice, it may happen thus, that a parent loses the entitlement to the allowances in case of unemployment and the claim to the other passes. The parents cannot choose freely the person who receives the allowances.
the working parents the previous part, in each case, and do not have purchase only in the second place, to claim the allowance, have financial and political reasons, says Liliane Probst, of the Federal social insurance office. Thus, the legislator did want to relieve the cantons, because they financed the allowances of non-working. "The family, the acquisition of allowances to be employed, however, by the contributions of employers and self-employed persons financed."
In the case of Claudia Byland the compensation Fund, stated that the father of her son, in the year 2017, did not meet the criteria for gainful employment. Therefore, the family stood by him allowances. Therefore, Byland has to pay the allowances. In return, the father can claim through his employer, the allowances for 2017 retrospectively and then to Claudia Byland.
Such Refund had not and would, in particular, in the case of self-employed, says Markus Lehmann, Co-head of the AHV branch office in the city of Bern. The reason is that The income of self-employed are often subject to fluctuations, not least because of the possible tax deductions. How much you would have effectively earned in a year, you would know only when the tax assessment. And so it could be retroactive to corrections in the case of family allowances, says Lehmann.
Claudia Byland is not now has to pay back only the erroneously received allowances, but also the father of her son to bring, he makes his claim and the money is transferred. This role as a plea to not be comfortable for you, says Byland, especially since they have hardly any contact with the father. After all these consented have to do what was necessary. Now she hopes that it works.
but in the cases where it doesn't work? For example, because the separated parents are totally on the outs, and a communication is not possible or because the father refuses, the allowances to claim and the mother pass on. Since the compensation would cover funds, says Markus Lehmann, from the AHV office in the city of Bern. "We turn, then, directly to the Fund, which is for the father of the child, and so it comes to a mutual settlement of the allowances on the funds." The go but only if both parents are in agreement.
mutual transfer among the funds would probably be most of the parents prefer, this would save you the tedious bureaucracy. But you do not offer this in any case, says Markus Lehmann. As long as the parents could it to some extent with each other, let them reverse the transaction.
Created: 31.03.2019, 19:31 PM