Habeck demands contributions on stock income – does that bring anything?

Habeck demands contributions on stock income – does that bring anything?

Green initiative
Habeck demands contributions on stock income – please what?






Robert Habeck and his Greens want to improve statutory health insurance. But the idea of ​​including capital gains more heavily comes with many problems.

At the beginning of the year, health insurance contributions rose sharply for many people; they now average 16.3 percent. In the future they could rise even further – if politicians do nothing about it. The head of the Techniker Krankenkasse recently warned of an increase in health insurance contributions of up to 20 percent. Now a proposal from Robert Habeck, the Green Party’s candidate for chancellor, is causing discussions.

What is Habeck’s initiative about?

On Sunday evening on ARD, Habeck called for health insurance contributions to also be paid on capital gains in the future. In order to help the health insurance companies obtain better financing, he would “like to increase the contribution base,” said Habeck. All those with statutory health insurance pay “taxes on wages, but capital gains, for example, are exempt from this.” He asked: “Why should work be burdened more than income from capital gains?” That doesn’t make sense to him.

This demand can also be found in the preliminary election program that the Greens presented in mid-December. “We will reform the contribution assessment and, for example, also use capital income to finance our health and care system,” it says. “In this way, we also protect wages and salaries from higher contributions.” On Sunday, Habeck added that this was also a “step towards a little more solidarity within the system.”

Does that bring anything?

In theory, Habeck’s proposal could increase health insurance companies’ overall revenue. The contribution base for statutory health insurance would be broadened: the health insurance companies would then be able to include income from capital assets in the calculation of their contributions for those with compulsory insurance and could apply their contribution rate to other income. To date, the income subject to contributions includes wages, statutory pensions, pension payments such as company pensions and income from self-employment. If the burden were spread more widely, it could stabilize or even reduce contribution rates in the future.

Further increase

TK boss expects health insurance contributions of 20 percent soon

In practice, however, expanding the contribution assessment basis would entail a high administrative burden. The banks and custodians have so far withheld the withholding tax of 25 percent from interest, dividends and profits from the sale of shares and funds for investors and paid it anonymously to the tax office. In order for financial institutions to be able to withhold and pay social security contributions automatically, extensive legal changes would be needed; Existing reporting systems would have to be adapted. Habeck’s initiative could not be implemented, at least in the short term.

Without automation, a broader assessment basis would mean that those with compulsory insurance would have to declare their income not only to the tax office, but also to the health insurance company. The insurers would depend on the honesty of the insured. As is the case with those who are voluntarily insured in statutory health insurance: for them, investment income already counts as part of their income subject to contributions. Therefore, you must regularly submit your income tax assessment and, if necessary, interest assessments or income statements from the bank to your health insurance company. This has so far affected around 6.2 million of the 74.3 million people insured by statutory health insurance.

Who would be particularly affected?

Habeck’s proposal would not affect everyone who is active on the stock exchange, but only those who are legally insured. Those with private insurance would be excluded. If Habeck’s proposal were implemented, their investment income would probably be better off. Or they would have to pay contributions without receiving benefits from statutory health insurance. It is questionable whether such unequal treatment would hold up in court.

In addition, if the contribution assessment limit were not changed significantly or even abolished entirely, this move would probably put a particular strain on smaller and middle income earners who, for example, use their deposits to build up their private pension provision. The so-called contribution assessment limit marks the maximum gross income up to which contributions are charged in statutory health and nursing care insurance. If your earnings exceed this income limit, you are exempt from contributions. In statutory health insurance, this limit has been 66,150 euros annually or 5,512.50 euros per month since the beginning of the year.

Many higher earners already exhaust this contribution assessment limit with their earnings and should therefore no longer have to pay social security contributions on their investment income. It would therefore particularly depend on whether the Greens linked their proposal to significantly increasing the contribution assessment limits or even abolishing them completely. The election program only vaguely mentions that they want to “reform” the assessment of contributions in general.

How does the political competition react?

Representatives of the Union and FDP are horrified by the proposal. Scientists and experts agree that a stronger equity culture is urgently needed for retirement provision in Germany, said CDU politician Christoph Ploß star. “Anyone who votes for the green party will have more burdens and taxes for hard-working citizens,” said Ploß, “but our weakening economy needs the exact opposite, namely tax relief.”

The Secretary General of the FDP sees it similarly: “What Habeck is proposing is a slap in the face, especially to the young generation,” wrote Marco Buschmann on “The point is: If the Greens can’t think of anything else, it will have to be new taxes and duties!”

Source: Stern

Leave a Reply

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

Latest Posts