Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 6kWORD 18k
22 March 2018
P-001747-18
Question for written answer P-001747-18
to the Commission
Rule 130
Sven Schulze (PPE) , Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE) , Dieter-Lebrecht Koch (PPE) , Bendt Bendtsen (PPE) , Nadja Hirsch (ALDE) , Heinz K. Becker (PPE) , Markus Ferber (PPE) , Markus Pieper (PPE) , Angelika Niebler (PPE) , Jeroen Lenaers (PPE) , Thomas Mann (PPE) , Helga Stevens (ECR)

 Subject:  Indexation practices regarding family benefits in certain Member States
 Answer in writing 

It seems questionable practices exist in some Member States in relation to the granting of family benefits. The following practices have been identified in situations where one parent works abroad in the Member State of secondary competence, while the rest of the family remains and works in the country of origin, which has the primary competence:

The payment of benefits is linked to an income threshold and a low age limit, exceeding which would mean no family benefit would be paid from the state of primary competence. Consequently, according to the current coordination rules, the Member State of secondary competence has to pay the entire amount, instead of only the difference.

At least one Member State taxes family benefits coming from another Member State.

Some Member States link their benefits to a criterion of parents and children sharing a common national residence, without accepting EU residences.

One Member State, even if it has the primary competence, does not pay its family benefits if another Member State already pays them.

1. Is the Commission aware of these practices?

2. Are these practices in line with European law?

3. Which actions will be taken in order to compensate the Member State of secondary competence in the cases mentioned above?

Last updated: 28 March 2018Legal notice