kathimerini.gr
Greece: Extra EFKA Fees for Salaried Freelancers Under €1273 Monthly Income
In Greece, salaried employees also working as freelancers with "blokakia" face extra EFKA payments if their salaried income is under €1,273 monthly gross, failing to cover the self-employed's second insurance category (€293.59 including a mandatory €10 unemployment contribution).
- What factors determine whether a salaried employee faces extra EFKA contributions for their freelance work?
- The additional EFKA contributions are triggered if a salaried employee's monthly gross income is below €1,273, failing to cover the €293.59 required for the second self-employed insurance category. This comprises €216.70 for pensions, €6.99 for cash health benefits, and €69.90 for in-kind health benefits. A 10 euro unemployment contribution is always added for each month of freelance work.
- What are the financial implications for Greek salaried employees who also work as freelancers, and how is this new contribution calculated?
- Thousands of Greek salaried employees who also work as freelancers using "blokakia" (service provision slips) face additional EFKA contributions if their salaried employment withholdings don't cover the self-employed's second insurance category. About 250,000 such workers may owe additional payments following a 2.7% contribution increase for the self-employed.
- How might this new contribution policy impact the economic stability of lower-income workers in Greece who engage in both salaried employment and freelance work?
- The impact varies based on income; those earning €1,500 gross monthly already cover the self-employment contributions and only pay the 10 euro unemployment contribution. However, those with lower salaries, like a worker earning €900, would need to pay an extra €86.05 per month of freelance work. This highlights a systemic issue impacting lower-income workers with dual employment.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the issue primarily from the perspective of the financial burden on employees, highlighting the additional costs and potential difficulties. While it includes factual information, the emphasis on the negative consequences might shape the reader's perception of the situation as overwhelmingly negative, potentially overlooking any potential positive aspects of the new regulations.
Language Bias
The article uses relatively neutral language. Terms like "additional contributions" and "increased costs" are factual and avoid overly emotional or judgmental language. However, the repeated emphasis on "additional costs" and "burden" could be considered slightly negatively charged.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses primarily on the financial implications for employees with dual employment, but omits discussion of potential policy reasons behind the increased contributions or broader societal impacts. It also doesn't explore alternative solutions or potential hardships faced by those affected.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat false dichotomy by focusing solely on the financial burden on employees without exploring the potential benefits of the increased contributions, such as improved social security system sustainability or future benefits.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights that thousands of salaried employees who also work as freelancers will have to pay additional contributions to the social security institution (EFKA) if their salary from their dependent employment does not cover the contribution of the second insurance category of freelancers. This creates an additional financial burden on lower-income individuals who engage in freelance work, exacerbating income inequality.