Europeanization of Long-Term Care – An economic approach to European Social Security Law –

1. Europeanizationof Long-Term Care–An economic approach to European Social Security Law – European Conference on Long-Term Care Mannheim, 21/22 October 2005

2. Structure • The Community‘s Provisions on Coordinating Social Security • The Provision of LTC in the U.K. and in Germany • Case Studies • Conlusio

3. The Community‘s Provisions on Coordinating Social Security

4. Why is Coordination Necessary? Territoriality principle + free movement „Coordination rules are rules of international social security law intended to adjust social security schemes in relation to each other, for the purpose of regulating transnational questions, with the objective of protecting the social security position of migrant workers.“ calls for

5. Basic Coordination Principles • Equal treatment • Determination of the applicable legislation – lex loci laboris • Maintenance of aquired rights – or: aggregation • The export of benefits

6. The European Provisions Coordination as an annex to free movement of labour Art. 42 EC: „The Council shall … adopt such measures in the field of social security as are necessary to provide freedom of movement for workers…“ Reg. 1408/71 resp. Reg. 883/2004

7. The Coordination of Long-Term Care LTC not explicitely within the material scope ECJ: Molenaar (1996) & Jauch (2001) Qualification as sickness benefits which fall under Reg. 1408/71 and Reg. 883/2004

8. The Provision of LTC in the U.K. and in Germany

9. LTC in Germany and the U.K.

10. England Attendance Allowance special non-contributory benefit  exception to the principle of exportability  Germany Pflegegeld subject to the principle of exportability cash-benefits from other Member States may be deduced Exportability of cash benefits  Cash benefits are paid by the competent institution

11. England subject to the principle of exportability Germany subject to the principle of exportability Exportability of benefits in kind   Services are provided on behalf of the competent institution by the institution of the country of residence

12. Case Studies LTC Cash Benefits LTC Benefits in Kind

13. A few assumptions… • The model care client… • is a senior citizen aged 65 or over and in need of long-term care. • does not integrate into the social protection schemes of the receiving Member State (competent state ≠ state of residence). • The current European co-ordination scheme is applied. • Neither financing, quality, nor take-up of benefits (etc) are taken into consideration. • The object of investigation is solely the legal provision of long-term care (no private out-of-pocket payments!)

14. Cash-Benefits: England  Germany

15. Cash-Benefits: Germany  England

16. Benefits in kind: England  Germany

17. Benefits in kind: Germany  England

18. Conclusio • For a migrating individual the current EU policy on coordination social security may not always provide satisfactory results. • Is there need for measures or should the results of the case studies be seen as a singular phenomena? Thank you!