Family allowances for civil servants, judges, and soldiers are costing the state substantial sums of money. According to data cited by “Welt am Sonntag” from a reply by the Federal Ministry of the Interior, the federal government allocated approximately 825.6 million euros in 2025 for family allowances paid to its federal civil servants, judges, and soldiers. This figure is supplemented by additional increase contributions of 0.177 million euros per month for lower salary groups.
Across the entire public sector, encompassing federal, state, and municipal levels, these family allowances totaled around 5.116 billion euros in 2025, as indicated by the Federal Ministry of Social Affairs’ report on the 2025 social budget, published in July. This trend has been increasing in recent years; the expenditure stood at 3.266 billion euros in 2010.
Civil servants receive these allowances when they marry or have children. These payments can amount to hundreds or even several thousands of euros per month, in addition to their basic salary. According to the government, this measure addresses precedents set by the Federal Constitutional Court, which, in several rulings, determined that the principle of provision requires the employer to guarantee “adequate maintenance to civil servants and their families for life.”
Gisela Färber, an economist at the German Research Institute for Public Administration, told “Welt am Sonntag” that, in certain instances, family allowances now exceed the basic salary. She noted that a civil servant with four children could potentially receive more than double the pay of a colleague without dependents, a situation she argued violates the merit principle. She also expressed doubt as to whether a state secretary could genuinely receive thousands of euros in monthly family allowances.
The German Civil Servants’ Union (DBB) also voiced severe criticism. Heini Schmitt, the union’s deputy federal chairman, stated that according to the Basic Law, salaries must always be commensurate with the duties of the office while adhering to the principle of merit. Schmitt argued that when the Constitutional Court previously ruled salaries were too low and therefore unconstitutional, lawmakers failed to make the necessary adjustments to basic wages. Instead, due to budget constraints, they heavily emphasized temporary, child-related salary components. In his view, this effectively devalues the fundamental importance of the basic salary, which should be solely based on the office held and the performance delivered.
The CDU’s parliamentary group in the Bundestag called for a fundamental change in course given the soaring costs. Alexander Throm, the party’s domestic affairs spokesman, acknowledged that the civil service status is rightly entrenched in the Basic Law and deserves special protection. However, he warned that the civil service should not be used as a tool for attracting personnel. He advocated that civil servants must be strictly limited to sovereign duties in the future-such as those in the judiciary, police, or tax administration-and suggested that the impending wave of retirements presents an opportunity to enforce this in new hires.
