Alles klar!
CSM isn’t an issue for us because our passive income will be well below the threshold.
It’s CSG (+ CRDS, CASA) I’m wondering about. Pretty sure I’ll be liable in the same amount irrespective of whether one of us is a “burden”
on the Sécu or both.
I was having a senior moment,….
No problem. Just had to edit my figures because I got my projected pension amount wrong.
Hi George
Yes, I really appreciate being able to talk to a tax official face to face.
I can’t imagine being old and perhaps not in the pink of health and trying to cope with ridiculously long waiting times to get through to a human on the phone.
If you’re talking 72000p.a. then I can see why France would think the household should be self-sufficient.
If you’re talking 250 euros pm payable for private insurance that covers everything - for a female in particular as private insurance and mutuelles tend to ratchet premiums up far faster with age for females than males - plus 60 euros pm extra tax/social then I’d consider taking the employer option at least for a few years depending how their premiums evolve. I’d consider sticking with it until 3 or 4 years in power, of the next French government as well. (As that gives long enough for problems in the French economy/mismanagement to have to be recognised, plus a year to see any new reductions, restrictions or limits in state support to be brought in 
)
Karen,
Just to be clear. You think I should stick with the private insurance for myself and pay around €250 per month in premiums, plus around €600 per month in prélèvements sociaux for my husband?
I see what you mean about possible cuts to Sécu cover in the future, but my husband is going to be exposed to those whatever I do.
I’ll give it some thought, though, as I hadn’t considered this angle. Thanks!
PS €600 per month in CSG etc. Not €60.
In what course of action would you be able to reduce the “prelevements sociaux” paid by your husband… ???
I seem to have lost the plot re that… I’d have thought that “if it’s due, it’s due”.
Stella,
I just need the Fisc to confirm that married couples pay CSG on 100% of their gross combined income, even if only one of them is à la charge de la Sécu. Some colleagues have suggested - wrongly I think - that some kind of allowance would be made for the fact that one member of the couple is not a burden on the Sécu.
When I retire my employer’s going to ask me if I want to keep private medical insurance for myself. But if I’m going to be paying CSG etc as if we were both à la charge de la Sécu, then I might as well join the Sécu too.
Well, that’s weird. Just saw the tax office and they were nice. But they claim that as regards CSG, CRDS etc they will look at our individual situations. And that I won’t be liable because I’m not à la charge de la sécu. And the husband won’t be liable because he won’t have any income in his name.
This does not tally with what I’ve found on the internet but the lady checked with 2 colleagues and they both said the same thing.
Sounds like good news. Colleagues are always right.
Mmm. Not entirely convinced myself. And this tax office has form (when it comes to saying one thing and doing another!).
OK, I’ve digested what the tax office said about CSG, CRDS, CASA and it makes more sense now.
It depends on the type of income.
As regards salaries & pensions, the tax office looks at what each member of the couple has declared in their respective columns. And levies CSG etc accordingly.
So for salaries & pensions, each member of the couple is treated separately.
Not so for others types of income. Such as rental income or bank interest. In that case, the couple is treated as a single unit. And no attempt is made to determine what portion of the income could reasonably be assigned to one or other member of the couple.
seems fair enough…
I agree. And they were very pleasant. Am so glad I went.
This has been very interesting Helenochka. Thank you for going into it in such detail, and for telling us.
So what’s your decision?
Sorry, I’m sure I’ve been boring the kn*ckers off people with this saga and the situation where one spouse is covered by the Sécu and the other is not is probably not a very common one.
Based on what the tax office said, I’ll definitely keep private health insurance for myself. The premiums will be much cheaper than the prélèvements sociaux that would be levied on my pension if I were to join the Sécu.
Am really surprised that I won’t be liable for my husband’s prélèvements sociaux (initially at least, he will have no salary or pension and will be à la charge de la Sécu).
Seems like a sensible outcome. By the way this is quite similar to the approach we have taken. Being insured privately for us is cheaper than prélèvements sociaux that would otherwise be due on my pension. The one difference from your scenario is that both of us are privately insured. Plans can change , but we will aim join sécu as and when I hopefully get an S1 from the UK in 2030 (!), and therefore should be exempt from the prélèvements sociaux…if they haven’t changed the rules by then!
Hey George
One point that might be of interest to people wondering about health cover and prélèvements sociaux is that any kind of French pension, however small, acts as a cap on the amount of prélèvements sociaux that can be levied on salary or pension income.
Apparently there is some rule whereby the prélèvements sociaux can never be more than the amount of the French pension.
Well that’s interesting.
Do you mean that those Brits who will receive a full new UK state pension, but who also worked a little in France for a small French state pension in future, will not in fact pay fat social security taxes in France in retirement because those taxes are limited to the amount of French state pension paid?