(de-news.net) – Reactions to the SPD Federal Executive Committee’s recent proposal for a new fee to fund the national health system have been notably divided, with significant support from the Ver.di union contrasted by strong opposition from the CDU/CSU faction in the Bundestag. This divergence in opinion underscores the ongoing debate over how to secure the long-term financial sustainability of Germany’s healthcare system while balancing economic and social policy objectives.
The Christian Democratic Union (CDU) has publicly expressed its disapproval of the SPD’s plan, emphasizing the necessity for broader reductions in social expenditures. CDU General Secretary Carsten Linnemann framed the proposal as inconsistent with the party’s broader economic agenda, which calls for lowering labor-related costs to spur economic growth and improve employment incentives. In Linnemann’s view, reducing the overall burden on employers and employees alike would create more favorable conditions for economic recovery. The Union has also pointed out that discussions regarding the reform of social insurance systems are already ongoing within the coalition.
SPD Parliamentary Manager Dirk Wiese acknowledged these negotiations and underscored that any potential reform would be shaped by previously established agreements. As part of these ongoing discussions, Federal Health Minister Nina Warken (CDU) is expected to present concrete proposals in March, with a primary focus on ensuring the long-term sustainability of statutory health insurance funding while also implementing necessary structural improvements in the healthcare sector. Linnemann, however, specifically highlighted the need to reduce “additional labor costs,” proposing that non-contributory services be removed from the statutory health insurance system to streamline funding and lower overall expenditures.
At the same time, Simone Borchardt (CDU), a key health policy expert of the CDU/CSU faction in the Bundestag, expressed strong opposition to the SPD’s approach, arguing that it could have unintended negative consequences. Borchardt criticized the proposal as potentially harmful to both investment capacity and performance incentives across broad segments of the population. In her view, adding new financial burdens could erode the very incentives that drive economic productivity. She also emphasized that before considering additional revenue measures, the focus should be on fully utilizing the existing efficiency reserves within the healthcare system. This approach, she argues, would ensure that the system is optimized before introducing further taxes or levies. Borchardt’s comments reflect a wider concern within the CDU that any reform must first focus on maximizing the efficiency of current systems before introducing new financial obligations.
The most recent statement against proposals advanced within the Social Democratic Party to broaden the revenue base of statutory health insurance was uttered by Federal Health Minister Nina Warken (CDU). Rather than extending contribution obligations to additional forms of private income, she emphasized that expenditures unrelated to insurance contributions should be assumed by the federal budget. In this context, Warken argued that financing such non-contributory services through general taxation would help correct what she described as a structural imbalance within the system. From her perspective, the existing financing arrangement imposes an inequitable burden on individuals insured under the statutory scheme, who collectively shoulder annual costs amounting to several billion euros to cover the health insurance of recipients of basic income support.
SPD urges solidarity-based financing as part of a comprehensive reform
In contrast to the Union’s critique, Ver.di union leader Frank Werneke has expressed his support for the SPD’s proposed reforms. Werneke underscored that it was increasingly logical to diversify the revenue streams used to fund the national health system, particularly by considering income sources beyond employment-related earnings. He specifically proposed that revenue from capital gains be included in the financing structure, not only to support the healthcare system but also to contribute to pension systems. This suggestion reflects the growing consensus among some unions that the financing burden should be shared more equitably across different income types, especially in light of the changing nature of work in the 21st century. However, Werneke tempered his enthusiasm by acknowledging that it was still unclear whether the SPD’s proposals would be accepted by the governing coalition, particularly given the opposition from CDU-affiliated policymakers.
During a party retreat in Berlin, SPD Chair Bärbel Bas reiterated the SPD’s commitment to a more equitable healthcare financing system, one that would include all forms of income, not just wages and salaries. She argued that it was time to modernize the healthcare funding structure, moving beyond the existing system where only voluntary members of statutory health insurance pay contributions on income, and even then, only up to the contribution assessment ceiling. Bas highlighted that, under the SPD’s proposal, income from sources such as capital gains and rental income would also be considered. In this framework, the SPD’s aim is not only to reduce contribution rates but also to introduce broader social reforms. A resolution passed by the SPD Federal Executive explicitly calls for extending pension insurance coverage to federal personnel, independent contractors, and elected officials under the principle that “everyone who works contributes.” Bas further emphasized that the SPD sought a comprehensive overhaul of the social state, rather than mere incremental adjustments, believing that a more inclusive and modernized social welfare system was essential for fostering trust in democracy.
SPD General Secretary Tim Klüssendorf also weighed in on the ongoing discussions surrounding potential cuts to benefits, particularly dental coverage and sick leave provisions. Klüssendorf condemned such cuts, arguing that the focus should be on creating a more just and efficient system rather than further reducing essential services. He stressed that many individuals rely on these benefits, making it critical to avoid raising contributions repeatedly. While advocating for a more equitable and solidarity-based funding model, Klüssendorf acknowledged that the proposal to levy a health fee on all income types was still in its preliminary stages and would require further examination. He noted that many issues, such as protecting small savers and determining appropriate thresholds, would need to be addressed before a final model could be adopted. Additionally, Klüssendorf pointed to the ongoing transformation of the labor market, where many companies are now generating substantial profits with fewer employees, suggesting that it is increasingly necessary to expand the range of income sources contributing to social welfare.
The SPD Bundestag faction’s Parliamentary Manager, Dirk Wiese, defended the party’s call for a fundamental shift in the way social benefits are financed. Wiese clarified that the proposal was not aimed at unilateral cuts, referencing the ongoing debates over dental care services, but instead called for structural reforms to improve the overall system. He argued that the current model needed significant adjustment to better align with contemporary economic realities. Furthermore, Wiese emphasized that the broader conversation about strengthening the revenue base for social services is ongoing. As part of this effort, the SPD executive has recently proposed including capital gains and rental income in the financing of both health and long-term care insurance. The ultimate goal is to reduce the financial burden on insured individuals while ensuring that the social welfare system remains adequately funded and sustainable in the long term.
