which will have its normative role.Second

Insiders agree to admit: the right to social security is a rare complex and there is no substitute, in the matter, the trials and tribulations of a control Urssaf. If the tech and the profusion of specific texts in force are part of this finding, it is also, and for many, the chronic inability of the system in place to have been known to generate a uniform administrative interpretation of the rule of law. It was well-known that the Urssaf were neither related between them by their respective decisions, nor bound by administrative doctrine issued by their authorities! Legal certainty attached to the calculation of social security contributions was more a challenge than a reality. Only indeed was legally recognized, since 2004 (1), the right of the employer to seek a possible arbitration of the central social security organizations (Acoss) Agency, when the same practice of several of its institutions gave rise between the different competent Urssaf to differences of interpretation under applicable legislation (article 243-6-1 of the Code of social security).

Compliance practices

This desire for harmonization of administrative practices for Honourable, was however largely insufficient. The recent strengthening of the legislative scheme relating to the rights of contributors so deserves particular attention (2).

First, employers can now oppose the Urssaf circulars or instructions issued by the Minister responsible for social security (article 243-6-2 of the Code of social security). In other words, the Urssaf can now proceed with relief when the contributor is merely apply the Ministerial interpretation published then in force. Unfortunately, this device is not the doctrine of Acoss and its breach by the Urssaf is not subject to any penalty. Its effectiveness will therefore depend on the goodwill of the Urssaf and the Ministry concerned, which will have its normative role.

Second, employers can now, in a so-called "social Rescript" procedure, spontaneously seek the position of the Urssaf on the conformity of their practices with regard to certain geographically limited, employer contributions exemptions retirement and pension and benefits in kind and cool professionals.

Secure operations

If you can regret its limited application, this mechanism interest requiring the Urssaf, once properly before deciding so motivated on the practice at issue. Or response within a period of four months, the Urssaf cannot perform recovery on the period of delay which lies upon him, and this until the notification of his explicit decision. And, simply put, any change in this position then require it to notify the employer, which may then seek the arbitration of Acoss!

With regard to the existing practices, it is however likely that employers give hardly a procedure which, if it did not lead to validation, to expose them in fine relief. However, it will certainly enable the contributors, the medium including made forms available to them (3), to secure a new practice before even its implementation.

The architecture of the rights of the contributor-employer in his relations with the administration leaves so strong at this last in the effectiveness of the system: the Ministry in charge of social security to enact an interpretative doctrine against all the Urssaf apply controls or rescrits and Acoss to arbitrate their disputes and other changes of position! An appointment is made...