A retiree must return 35,939.56 euros of his retirement pension to Social Security after compatible the collection of the benefit with a work as farming administrator without having previously communicated it. In this way, the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid gives the reason to Social Security by explaining that this pensioner incurred an incompatibility provided for in article 213 of the General Law of Social Security and in the regulations that regulate retirement pensions and their compatibility with work.
As explained by the sentence, the man, after retiring in the Special Regime of Autonomous Workers in March 2010, the pensioner requested the Social Security retirement pension. At that time he began to collect the pension, but without telling the General Treasury of Social Security that he was still working for a company as a farm administrator.
You may be interested
Several retirees older than 80 years speak clearly: “I regret having given my properties to my daughters ahead of time”
Jaime Palomera, real estate analyst, warns retirees: “To have a dignified retirement they will have to sell their homes”
This situation remained for years until in 2021, the Labor Inspection realized that this retiree was a single and agent administrator of several societies, that is, he continued to exercise a work activity. After interviews with workers and documentation review, the inspectors concluded that the pensioner continued to exercise “habitual and directly” management and supervision functions in the company, which was incompatible with collecting their pension.
Therefore, Social Security proceeded to suspend the pension and claim the amounts unduly charged that made a total of 35,939.56 euros. Social security made it clear that “the pension is considered undue from the start date of the corresponding activities” and that the retiree had the “obligation to reimburse the unduly perceived.” Not agreeing with this decision decided to go to court.
The retirement pension is incompatible with working except certain cases
Both the Social Court number 9 and later the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid (TSJM) gave the reason to Social Security, that is to say that the retiree did not act correctly by compatible with the pension with a job. Justice explained that the retiree had not demonstrated that his position was merely representative or that another person assumed the management of the company.
Thus and as stated in the sentence “the interested party just affirmed that his position was not paid”, but that allegation was not enough to prove compatibility. That is, he claimed that he did not charge to avoid the return. Therefore, the Chamber was clear: “The pension is considered undue from the start date of the corresponding activities” and there is the “obligation to reimburse the unduly perceived.”
He did not communicate it to Social Security
The nucleus of the case is in the incompatibility between retirement and work pension, regulated in article 213 of the General Social Security Law. The standard allows the pension to be compatible with certain activities, such as part -time works or self -employed activities provided that income does not exceed the minimum interprofessional salary (SMI), but requires communicating previously to Social Security.
None of that happened here and that is why the court explains and recalls that the pensioner “did not request flexible retirement or communicate to Social Security the work for the company as an administrator of farms.” In addition, the evidence showed that it practiced “regularly and regularly” the management functions, which completely moved him away from the compatibility cases.
For this reason, the Chamber concludes that “the ignorance of the limits set to admit that simultaneity must rise concordant consequences with a double purpose: to correct breach and compensate for the contribution deficit.” For all the explained, the suspension of the pension and the claim of the 35,939.56 euros collected improperly was consistent with the law.