The debate regarding the standard rate of the Citizen’s Income (Bürgergeld) is receiving support from the Union (CDU/CSU) within the coalition government. Marc Biadacz, the social policy spokesman for the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, told Bild that the discussion about the basic security rate must be conducted factually within the coalition. He noted that the coalition contract already provides for changing the rate adjustment mechanism, which they plan to regulate in the Basic Security II Law. This stance follows earlier proposals by Alexander Dobrindt, a federal interior minister, to potentially lower the standard rate.
Supporting this idea is Peter Aumer, a Bundestag member and social policy expert for the CSU. Aumer confirmed Dobrindt’s position, stating that the height and calculation of the Citizen’s Income standard rate should be thoroughly reviewed. He argued that the substantial increases implemented previously under the preceding coalition were primarily a reaction to exceptionally high inflation. However, he pointed out that the actual economic developments since then have been different. According to the current legal calculation mechanism, the rates could even decrease, though existing legislation currently prevents any reduction. “We must increase the efficacy of our social systems, incentivize work more strongly, and relieve the budget of social expenditures, but the Citizen’s Income must not be excluded from this review,” added Alexander Hoffmann, chief of the CSU regional group.
Conversely, the Social Democrats (SPD) emphasize legal constraints. Annika Klose, the SPD parliamentary spokesperson for labor and social affairs, pointed out that the standard rates mentioned by Dobrindt are statistically recalculated and mandated every five years under the Need Assessment Act (Regelbedarfsermittlungsgesetzes). She stressed that this legislation is already scheduled for this year, making a new call for a rate review unnecessary.
Klose maintained that the primary focus must remain on securing the subsistence minimum and ensuring social participation for all recipients, requiring precise analysis rather than speculation. She also firmly stated that the rates are not significantly too high, as has been suggested. Klose noted that both social and welfare associations already signal that current daily living prices and the challenges to social inclusion faced by recipients are considerable.
