His pockets are empty, but he's still supposed to pay the insurance.

His pockets are empty, but he's supposed to pay the insurance. (Photo: © alexkalina/123RF.com)

Read aloud:

The managing director receives nothing, but he still has to pay his health insurance.

Managing directors who are voluntarily insured under the statutory health insurance scheme must still pay social security contributions in the event of the company's insolvency – even though they themselves no longer receive any income. The Federal Social Court is uncompromising on this point.

A voluntary Members of the statutory health insurance (GKV) must also contribute to the Social insurance pay if it is due to insolvency the employer actually no salary got. The mandatory The obligation to pay contributions to health and long-term care insurance arises as soon as the legal requirements are met. independent from the actual inflow of salary, ruled the Federal Social Court.

The case

An employed managing director received a salary reduction starting in January 2015 due to his employer's financial difficulties. no salary more. He was voluntarily insured under the statutory health insurance systemFour months later, insolvency proceedings were opened against the company's assets. The former managing director filed his salary claims of approximately €55.000 with the insolvency administrator. However, he received nothing from the insolvency estate.

Seine Statutory health insurance Nevertheless, the open [requirements] were demanded Posts based on his – unpaid, but contractually agreed – monthly salary of 5.000 euros. The dispute went to court.

The judgment

The Federal Social Court sided with the health insurance company. The former managing director must pay, because the decisive factor is solely the legally owed entitlement to remuneration under labor law, without regard on it, whether and to what extent"He will also receive his money, according to the verdict."

You might also be interested in:

No unequal treatment

Volunteer members would have – Different as an employee subject to compulsory insurance – the contribution alone to wear. This unequal treatment is no violation against the general Principle of equality some Article 3 paragraph 1 Basic Law, since, in principle, voluntarily insured persons are less in need of protection than employees with compulsory insurance.

Also opposite self-employed Voluntarily insured persons, for whom the calculation is based on incoming income, are subject to this. no unjustified unequal treatment before. Because this is due to the differences is Types of income factual justified, That was the ruling. Income from self-employment could fluctuate considerably over the course of the year. fluctuations The Federal Social Court explained that this would be subject to regulations that required an annual assessment. Furthermore, it would be simpler for the administration if the income of self-employed individuals were calculated according to the same rules for social security and tax purposes.

Federal Social Court, judgment of December 10, 2025, Ref. B 6a/12 KR 1/24 R

The advisors at the Chambers of Crafts will be happy to help you with any legal questions!

DHB now also digital!Simply click here and register for the digital German Crafts Journal (DHB)!

Text: / handwerksblatt.de

You might also be interested in: