Klingbeil does not see parental allowance as a social benefit and therefore finds the cuts wrong.
(Photo: dpa)
Berlin In the coalition dispute over savings in parental allowance, SPD chairman Lars Klingbeil proposes instead the abolition of spouse splitting for new marriages. “We are finally getting rid of marriage splitting. This would put an end to the antiquated tax model that favors the classic distribution of roles between men and women. And the state would save money,” Klingbeil told the editorial network Germany (RND).
Spouse splitting describes the procedure according to which married couples and life partnerships are taxed who do not choose individual assessment. The joint income is halved, the income tax due is calculated and the tax liability is then doubled.
This is particularly useful for couples where one earns a lot and the other a little. According to the Federal Agency for Civic Education, this will cost the state 20 billion euros a year in 2020.
Klingbeil said: “I am in favor of higher incomes shouldering more and taking more responsibility. But questions about distribution are clarified through tax policy, not through parental allowance,” said Klingbeil. The parental allowance is not a social benefit, but should motivate men to take on more responsibility in the family.
So far, parental allowance has been given to couples whose joint taxable income is less than 300,000 euros. As part of the budget planning for the coming year and the spending cuts to limit debts pushed by Federal Finance Minister Christian Lindner (FDP), the traffic light coalition plans to lower the limit to 150,000 euros. This had been controversial.
Instead of a reduction in parental allowance: Lisa Paus rejects the FDP proposal
Critical voices came from the FDP against the cut and a different distribution of the service was proposed. The FDP Vice-Chairman Johannes Vogel has already met with rejection from Federal Family Minister Lisa Paus (Greens).
Vogel said on Sunday evening on the television talk show “Anne Will”: “I think it’s wrong if we just shave the parental allowance with the lawn mower, even in an area where we talk about engineers, doctors.” He supported one Proposal from the FDP to require couples to align their parental months more closely – if this does not happen, only one partner should receive parental allowance. In addition, Paus also “still has a certain savings potential in the area of the numerous funding programs,” said Vogel.
Paus immediately rejected this on the show. “If that works with the partnership, then that’s not a cut,” she said. “That’s why I can’t suggest it either.” According to her, alternative savings options would only be cuts in the advance maintenance payment for women living alone whose partner does not meet his payment obligations, and in the child allowance.
She doesn’t want either, as Paus made clear. She is already making cuts in the free programs, so there will be fewer opportunities for voluntary service.
“I’m open to better suggestions – but I took a look at it and from all these bad variants I came up with what I think is the best variant,” explained Paus with a view to the cancellation of parental allowance for high earners. “That’s how I’ll bring it in now.”
More: Guest comment: Couples with an income of 150,000 euros are not super-rich – cutting their parental allowance is absurd
First publication: 07/10/2023, 07:51.