Are owners of real estate entitled to Harzt IV benefits? This is decided by the size of the property and the number of residents, as the Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) has now ruled (1 BvL 12/20). According to the BVerfG, "funds of the general public, which are intended to help its needy members, [are] only to be claimed in cases in which there is currently a need.
In the case at hand, a woman applied for basic benefits. Together with her husband and their six children, she lived in a house of about 140 square meters. The last child moved out nine years ago. The job center rejected the application for basic benefits. The reason for this was that the plaintiff's husband was the owner of a house and thus had assets that exceeded the tax-free amount that was relevant for the plaintiff and him. Rightly so, as the BVerfG found. A maximum house size of 90 square meters was appropriate for two people.
The BVerfG points out that owner-occupied residential property is only protected when receiving basic welfare benefits if it is of an "appropriate size". The BVerfG thus does not follow the Social Court's argument that parents are placed in a worse position because they had to care for children in the past and had to have more living space for them. "[...] The persons concerned [are] not denied benefits here, which they needed to secure their existence. For they have residential property that they can use and thus secure their needs themselves." In this case, this means that the family would have to sell their house before basic security benefits could be received.
Sources: bundesverfassungsgericht.de/tagesschau.de
© Fotolia
