1 / 10

Non-compliance in child maintenance obligations – A new ‘social risk’?

Non-compliance in child maintenance obligations – A new ‘social risk’?. Frederic De Wispelaere UCSIA International Workshop ‘THE FAMILY KALEIDOSCOPE. Evolving Partnerships and Parenting’ March 20 th 2014. Contents. Context Guaranteed maintenance scheme Answer to a new ‘social risk’?

alaina
Download Presentation

Non-compliance in child maintenance obligations – A new ‘social risk’?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Non-compliance in child maintenance obligations – A new ‘social risk’? Frederic De Wispelaere UCSIA International Workshop ‘THE FAMILY KALEIDOSCOPE. Evolving Partnerships and Parenting’ March 20th 2014

  2. Contents • Context • Guaranteed maintenance scheme • Answer to a new ‘social risk’? • Should be considered as a social assistance scheme? • Conclusionanddiscussion UCSIA International Workshop - March 20th 2014

  3. Context • Different types of child maintenance schemes; • BE: Service for Maintenance Claiming (DAVO/SECAL): • Claim and advance child maintenance in case of non-compliance; • Eligibility:monthlyincome of the applicant/creditor below a certainthreshold (2014: € 1,386 + € 66 per child); • Monthly max. amount of advance: € 175 per child. UCSIA International Workshop - March 20th 2014

  4. A new ‘social risk’? • “Situations in whichindividualsexperiencewelfare lossesandthat have arisen as a result of the socioeconomictransformationsthat have taken place over the past decades and are generallysubsumedunder the heading of post-industrialisation” (Bonoli, 2006; 2007). Family structuresinfluencedbyanincreasing percentage of divorces/separations -> new family structures (e.g. single-parent families, …) • Individual impact -> negativeconsequencesinvolvedchildren; • Social risk = poverty risk? ( components of def. ‘Welfare’ ); • Socioeconomictransformation: new family structures + incapacitytopaychild maintenance. UCSIA International Workshop - March 20th 2014

  5. A new ‘social risk’? – some figures General • 4.6% Belgianhouseholds are entitled to a maintenance payment(SILC 2009) • 13% of these households are confrontedwith a non-payment(SILC 2009) Single-parent families • 4.3% of the EU households are single-parent families (Eurostat – 2012) • 57.9% of the EU single-parent families have 1 child(Eurostat – 2012) • BE: Almost4 out of 10 single-parent families are entitled to a maintenance payment(SILC 2009) • EU ‘at-risk-of-povertyrate’ of 34.6%% for single-parent families (general EU povertyrate: 16.9%) (Eurostat – 2011) • Even higherforsingle-parent families who do notreceive a maintenance payment(BE: 42.6% compared to 22.8%) (SILC 2009) • Single-parent families withonly 1 child show a muchlower risk of povertycompared to single-parent families with multiple children (BE: 32.2% for 1 childand 48.6% for 3 or more children) (SILC 2009) UCSIA International Workshop - March 20th 2014

  6. A social assistance scheme? • Public or private responsibility? • Specificsocialand financial needs; • DAVO/SECAL: income of applicant/creditorwillbe taken into account (means-tested); • Risk of ‘Moral hazard’ ? • Non-take-up? • Redistributiveandpoverty-reducingcapacity? • Financedbygeneral sources (tax revenues) <-> chance of recovery; • Prohibitionto claim child maintenance fromdebtorsreceiving a guaranteed minimum income(leefloon/revenu d’intégration) or receivinganincomeequalto or lowerthanthisthreshold. UCSIA International Workshop - March 20th 2014

  7. A social assistance scheme? – some figures • 52% of the householdswithchildrenconfrontedwith a non-payment are entitled to an advance of DAVO/SECAL, sincetheyfall below the incomethreshold(SILC 2006 and 2009) • Take-up: 61% of the entitledhouseholds or 69% of the children living in these households(SILC 2006 and 2009 confrontedwithadministrative data from DAVO/SECAL) • Non of the entitledhouseholds below the povertythreshold are notentitledtoanadvance (SILC 2006 and 2009 confronted with administrative data from DAVO/SECAL) • Lowestincome deciles: limited share in contributionwhilethey benefit from the advances • Creditoranddebtor: fallwithinlowestincome deciles (Tax declarationsfiscalyear 2009) • DAVO/SECAL cannotrecoverfrom37% of the debtors (or 43% of the amounttoberecovered)(Tax declarations fiscal year 2009) • Onlyfor 5% of the files wherean advance is provided, DAVO/SECAL is ableto claim allunpaid maintenance (administrative data fromDAVO/SECAL) UCSIA International Workshop - March 20th 2014

  8. A social assistance scheme? – somefigures Redistributive capacity * Different income deciles are appliedto list the share in contribution or in receiving. Also, the share in number of persons receivingan advance of DAVO/SECAL andnot the share in the expenses of DAVO/SECAL is provided. Source:Decoster, 2009; Pacolet & De Wispelaere, 2012 based at DAVO/SECAL administrative data UCSIA International Workshop - March 20th 2014

  9. A social assistance scheme? – somefigures Cox proportional hazard model Source:Pacolet & De Wispelaere, 2012 based at DAVO/SECAL administrative data UCSIA International Workshop - March 20th 2014

  10. Conclusion and discussion • Guaranteed maintenance scheme • Answer to a new ‘social risk’? • Should be considered as a social assistance scheme? UCSIA International Workshop - March 20th 2014

More Related