Non-EU spouse's income and German spouse's Hartz IV

89 posts in this topic

7 minutes ago, jeba said:

What makes you think you´ll be regarded a "Hartz IV person" as long as you´re not applying for it yourself? I doubt this is correct?

Well you're wrong. How many times have we discussed speculating on matters that you don't understand? :angry:

 

Once they are married and she is living in Germany, she becomes a part of her husband's Bedarfsgemeinschaft and will be required to disclose her worldwide assets and income. 

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, engelchen said:

Well you're wrong. How many times have we discussed speculating on matters that you don't understand? :angry:

 

Once they are married and she is living in Germany, she becomes a part of her husband's Bedarfsgemeinschaft and will be required to disclose her worldwide assets and income. 

Well, I have no doubt that she will be regarded part of the Bedarfsgemeinschaft once married. But does that mean she would be regarded as a recipent herself by the alien authority when it comes to granting residence permits even though she hasn´t applied for subsidies herself? That would amount to punishing her for marrying a HartzIV recipient (or at least disincentivise her to do so) and therefore I dared to ask (not speculate!).

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, engelchen said:

 

German citizens are not required to demonstrate that they can support their dependents! Sufficient funds are not required for family reunification to German citizens!

@engelchen With all due respect,my GerMan was required by ABH to submit 3 latest payslips and show proof of adequate housing.Perhaps Hartz IV folks don't have to?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe that clerk at the Ausländeramt got mixed up?

 

A family reunion visa to join a non-German does ask for proof that you have enough living space, see §29 Absatz 1 Nr. 2 AufenthG.

 

However, for family reunion to join a German, it does not, see §28 AufenthG.

 

You can look up these sections of the law in their English translation here: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_aufenthg/englisch_aufenthg.html

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jeba said:

This part rings a bell with me as it is a view my girlfriend is also holding (unfortunatley!). Mentioning something to someone and giving food for thought isn´t the same as forcing something on someone. Otherwise you could even say we shouldn´t even answer your posts as you can think for yourself - a point of view which wouldn´t be very helpful.

 

I see what you mean Jeba. I can give him the situation the way I think it is and reference my research and he can compare it with his own research and see the picture for himself. Then he can decide for himself what he wants to do or suggest we do. What needs to be done is very clear anyway. If this was a creative idea, a thing that could be missed etc, sure I would tell him. Stating the obvious makes no difference in my eyes. I can clarify what I'm ready to do, what I can do etc. And then I'm sure we will find a way.  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jeba said:

This part rings a bell with me as it is a view my girlfriend is also holding (unfortunatley!). Mentioning something to someone and giving food for thought isn´t the same as forcing something on someone. Otherwise you could even say we shouldn´t even answer your posts as you can think for yourself - a point of view which wouldn´t be very helpful.

 

I see what you mean Jeba. I can give him the situation the way I think it is and reference my research and he can compare it with his own research and see the picture for himself. Then he can decide for himself what he wants to do or suggest we do. What needs to be done is very clear anyway. If this was a creative idea, a thing that could be missed etc, sure I would tell him. Stating the obvious makes no difference in my eyes. I can clarify what I'm ready to do, what I can do etc. And then I'm sure we will find a way.  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jeba said:

Well, I have no doubt that she will be regarded part of the Bedarfsgemeinschaft once married. But does that mean she would be regarded as a recipent herself by the alien authority when it comes to granting residence permits even though she hasn´t applied for subsidies herself? That would amount to punishing her for marrying a HartzIV recipient (or at least disincentivise her to do so) and therefore I dared to ask (not speculate!).

 

In regard to your previous question, what confuses me is the English translation of some legal documents and offical information pages where it says "You will be asked to prove.." I don't know if this is our plural "you" as a family unit or me in person. After the explanations here and the referenced source, I have come to believe that this is us together. I may have to check this with a lawyer though. 

 

I also feel that there is a punishment here, for lack of a better word, not of me but of the German national. Basically he has been on unemployment for 10 years before me and it seems probable that he will be after me as well. So he marries someone who supports herself, doesn't apply for or use any benefit (why don't they take back the extras they give him?) and fails to live with his wife in his own country because of his own situation. I don't know what changes because of me. I can't even say I don't want benefits officially because we are now a unit. I can understand Germany not wishing to offer me anything, why would it or should it? But I equally have difficulty grasping why people on benefit cannot do whatever they have been doing (or change it if they like) if they choose to marry someone just self-sufficient? This condition tells him to move to another country if he wishes to remain with me basically. It's not even a preventative legal thing as it is not possible to live without health insure or other things in Germany anyway. If I'm doing that, deport me. If I'm not looking after myself, I can't survive anyway. This would not happen to a financially more secure German national. I have no problems with family income seen as something shared. But where mine does not suffice but I am self-sufficent, why doesn't Germany just look after its own citizen. What changes here because of me?

 

Why are we being given just one option of using benefits "together" and then facing consequences for this? I would agree to reject these benefits for myself right from the start if I could but I cannot do that. Strange really, first to offer something and then expect us not to use it so that we can stay together. 

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, zeino said:

Basically he has been on unemployment for 10 years before me ...

 

How has he managed this? And how old is he? Normally when your'e on unemployment you have to prove to the Arbeitsagentur that you are actively looking for a job. The system isn't there to support scammers, but for the needy, so when his situation changes (for instance due to marriage and a supportive spouse) of course he is obliged by law to unburden the system for the benefit of others who are really needy. The system doesn't care about your love life and your egoistical personal choices. 

8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bramble said:

 

How has he managed this? And how old is he? Normally when your'e on unemployment you have to prove to the Arbeitsagentur that you are actively looking for a job. The system isn't there to support scammers, but for the needy, so when his situation changes (for instance due to marriage and a supportive spouse) of course he is obliged by law to unburden the system for the benefit of others who are really needy. The system doesn't care about your love life and your egoistical personal choices. 

 

He worked in a rental programme through Arbeitsagentur I think. He worked and actively looked for jobs in these 10 years, did not reject anything at all. He attended his appointments, interviews and he didn't do one illegal thing. he is 40. Then he became depressed and suicidal actually, and spent five weeks in an enclosed ward because of his risk of suicide. It is there his psychiatrist encouraged him to rebuild his life, aim for higher and he actually has a report from his psychatrist that he isn't advised to work in certain jobs. And the social pedagogue (if I'm using the right term) also reports that his depression is due to social circumstances. Do you think these professionals are both scammers, too? I have stated before that he has a condition that does not classify as disability but I hope he doesn't get worse. To you he is a scammer, OK. You are morally much higher than him. OK. I hope these things do not happen to you or to your beloved ones really. There are things in life beyond the scammer discourse. I have stated these in the most objective, non-personal terms and that's what matters. The rest is scandals of our life which is our business only.

 

And yes, it is only rational that if the German system builds its notion of social support on the notion of family, people who can support each other cannot ask for support from the state. They should think about this before they get married really. But you see that this is the law anyway. We cannot break this, we don't have choices. This is how it will happen. Only people who agree with this should get married, the state is very clear about what will happen. On what grounds are you suggesting that this is left to us "scammers"? Your perspective is wrong simply because we cannot choose to do or simply do the things you are suggesting. It is illegal and the state has access to what we have and we don't have. It is in the records. And I'm stating for the umpteenth time that with all our means, we together can support one person in this unit and two. And the person who needs support is the German national. My whole point is I don't want to use benefits. And he needs them. You don't decide that Bramble. The state experts do under the guidance of a medical team that I believe are not scammers. Is this really so difficult to grasp?  

 

And how can you judge people morally when there is not even a moral choice but a neautral law that binds everyone equally? In your discourse, we are not only immoral but also criminals. Presumption of innocence, please. The basis of western law. Nothing gives you the right to call people scammers because they are willing to learn their rights and wish to operate within them. What scam really? Please stand by your words and tell me what scam we are in. 

 

Why should the state care about our "love life"? What makes you think that we want the system to care about our "love life"? You and I can perhaps discuss my and my boyfriend's situation within the framework of a German national's constitutional rights and the notion of family that the German state itself protects by law. These, I suppose, entail more than our "love life." And of course the German state doesn't care about our love life because it is a democracy, thank God. It does care about the illegal and illegitimate exploitation of the sacrecy of family for other purposes as it should do.

 

 Theoretically, we can ponder about whether an "obligation to unburden the system" can exist. Can you logically have an obligation when previous to that you lose your rights anyway? So the condition of "obligation to unburden" is rendered non-existent anyway - as the system already ensures this? But we are scammers with egoistical choices and a wish that the system recognizes our "love life." 

 

As for egoistical life choices. I believe people can have egoistical choices as long as they are legal. Driving a car is perhaps one in some countries where pollution is a serious problem. We can discuss its ethics. However, this is irrelevant because the German state is advanced enough to have built its existence on a legal presence instead of people's egoistical or whatnot choices. 

 

Yes, I still wish to learn about the scam we are conducting. 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, zeino said:

He worked in a rental programme through Arbeitsagentur I think. He worked and actively looked for jobs in these 10 years, did not reject anything at all. He didn't do one illegal thing. Then he became depressed and suicidal actually, and spent five weeks in an enclosed ward because of his risk of suicide. It is there his psychiatrist encouraged him to rebuild his life, aim for higher and he actually has a report from his psychatrist that he isn't advised to work in certain jobs. And the social pedagogue (if I'm using the right term) also reports that his depression is due to social circumstances. Do you think these professionals are both scammers, too? I have stated before that he has a condition that does not classify as disability but I hope he doesn't get worse. To you he is a scammer, OK. You are morally much higher than him. OK. I hope these things do not happen to you or to your beloved ones really. There are things in life beyond the scammer discourse. 

 

Listen, you didn't offer this kind of information before, so what with all your other wailings about how unfair the system is considering your future plans, what do you think people should believe. I know relatives of my own who for years have been regularly inventing psychiatric conditions just to be able to go on Harz IV and their therapists go along with it. Yet I know for a fact that they are liars and that they are definitely scamming the system. May not be the case with your boyfriend, but it sounds like it.

 

As for the rest of your ramblings, I for one am no longer interested. 

7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, zeino said:

 So he marries someone who supports herself, doesn't apply for or use any benefit (why don't they take back the extras they give him?) and fails to live with his wife in his own country because of his own situation. I don't know what changes because of me.

From the state´s perspective there are 2 possible changes: i) he might get spousal support which makes social grants unnecessary or less necessary, thereby unburdening the state; ii) he leaves the country which will also unburden the state as he won´t have a claim to Hartz IV as a nonresident (the law was changed several years ago to rule that out).

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, AnswerToLife42 said:

 

 

I'm sorry AnswerToLife42, I'm not familiar with the exact term. Do you mean it like codepency or rescuer tendencies? 

 

If so, you have a valid point not just based on my personal psychological makeup but I really believe people should consider why they are doing what, what sort of conditioning they have had etc. 

 

And thank you for the comment if this is what you mean as it can only protect me. I appreciate it. 

 

As far as I can see where I'm standing, I cannot go to extreme lengths to make things happen just because I would like them to happen in ways I would like. (Security for my partner in his country, a modest self-sufficient life for  me, happy-in-laws). Neither would I enjoy something in my romantic life that I have managed with my efforts or means only. Certain things are beautiful when created together. I cannot compensate for other people's choices. I can only know my boundaries and keep myself contained in them, better not to resent anyone afterward. And I expect mutuality in care and consideration like anyone really. If I don't stick to these, I will not be valuing myself. So live and let live really. 

 

In all this, I am only grateful that we actually do have circumstances to live somewhere without much effort. Many people are separated due to really painful and difficult things. We are not at that position as a couple. So, live ad let live really:) 

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jeba said:

From the state´s perspective there are 2 possible changes: i) he might get spousal support which makes social grants unnecessary or less necessary, thereby unburdening the state; ii) he leaves the country which will also unburden the state as he won´t have a claim to Hartz IV as a nonresident (the law was changed several years ago to rule that out).

 

Yes, it is exactly this second condition that I find unfair on a universal basis. Not from my perspective as an immigrant. If I had to leave my country because of this, I would feel the same. I see that this is a choice, but I would feel like "Hey, my country, I understand you don't want to look after my spouse, but how about me? What changed in the relationship between you and me?"

 

Maybe I'm thinking this way because the German system and understanding are completely foreign to me. We are not exactly a welfare state here in my country. There is very little social support. Marriage changes what we can claim but residence rights of the family unit never enters this equation. It is also interesting that our health insurance is considered a part of our assets as we have paid for it with our taxes and from our wages. Therefore, we can share it with our spouses automatically. For instance, my foreign spouse is automatically included in my insurance without any extra pay, he can just benefit from it because I have paid for that insurance all my life and can also share it in my family unity. If I'm unable to do this, then the state provies me with insurance and under certain circumstances, I can share that with my spouse as well. I like this:) I hope it stays like this because it is a nice right that recognizes family unity:)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Afrofrau said:

Was she right though when she said after 3 years of holding an Aufenthaltstitel I am going to qualify for a Niedererlaubnis?

 

Not if you live in Hawaii, see §28 Absatz 2 AufenthG:

"die familiäre Lebensgemeinschaft mit dem Deutschen im Bundesgebiet fortbesteht"

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, jeba said:

From the state´s perspective there are 2 possible changes: i) he might get spousal support which makes social grants unnecessary or less necessary, thereby unburdening the state; ii) he leaves the country which will also unburden the state as he won´t have a claim to Hartz IV as a nonresident (the law was changed several years ago to rule that out).

 

Sure and I don't have a problem with any of this. This is only fair and reasonable. I am a firm believer in shared income. Because of my post, we are always mentioning this in terms of "losing" benefits but this is actually something protective of couples as well. I mean when we think of the opposite, imagine a couple where one is quite wealthy but chooses not to share their income and the other is forced to live on benefits. What sort of marriage would that be? (Abusive in my opinion.) And yes, if people have decided to unite their lives for good, they should agree to share their income. And yes, why should the state provide for high-wealth families where one spouse chooses to store their income? My opinions on what is considered common law differs but if common law gives people certain rights, this is only the natural consequence I suppose. 

 

I am OK with my money taken into account. I am OK with spending it for us. If we are not OK with this as a couple, then we move somewhere else. And if he loses his benefits, he does. YOu are right. If his benefits are more important than a woman, he should keep his benefits and let the woman go. 

 

My only trouble is that I as an individual must prove that I am not a burden to the state. I'm OK with this, too. What do Germany and German people owe me really? For one thing, Germany's money comes from taxes I reckon, that is people's money. Wjy should it be spent on me as I am here by choice - not running away from war, my life is not under any threat as defined by recognized international pacts. This is OK. Only I thought me not being a burden on the state should be enough. It never occurred to me that my spouse would be taken into the "self-sufficiency" equation. This is also because everything I read mentions "You will need to prove.." and I thought it was just me - because I am the one applying for residency. I now see that the family unit must not be a burden on the system. Fair enough. 

 

I understand that it becomes my job to take care of my husband. And the state steps in where I don't suffice. This is good. We should be grateful for this as well. My only trouble is in terms of trying to prove my own sufficency but that is now also clear. It's not me, it's us together. 

 

It is good that Germany provides an initial permit to give people a chance to form a unit that is not a burden on the system. But it may become impossible for some couples to make this real due to the German national's condition. We don't have this issue in my country, I can find it unfair from my perspective. Likewise, everyone is entitled to criticize or dislike the system I was raised in. Ultimately, it is up to German citizens to decide what they want to do about this. I remain in my country thinking it's unfair to German nationals. What does this change? People hold all sort of opinions. That's all:) 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to misunderstand what permanent residency would imply: it would mean that if you got divorced you would get to stay indefinitely in Germany and you on your own would be entitled to welfare (= Hartz IV), for life.

Do you wonder why the German states tries to avoid this situation?

 

As long as you stay married you have de facto permanent residency, in the sense that you get to stay here for life. 

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, PandaMunich said:

You seem to misunderstand what permanent residency would imply: it would mean that if you got divorced you would get to stay indefinitely in Germany and you on your own would be entitled to welfare (= Hartz IV), for life.

Do you wonder why the German states tries to avoid this situation?

 

As long as you stay married you have de facto permanent residency, in the sense that you get to stay here for life. 

 

I can see how this can be exploited, yes. And I am fully aware that it is also exploited in gigantic proportions. And I am aware that Germany wants to prevent it with good intentions: to have a sustainable social state for its people - something that I can only respect. I think the social state is a wonderful invention. And the more a state offers to its people, the more it will wish to control how many people will benefit from it - so that it can continuously offer those things. Germany does not have unlimited resources. 

 

I now see what you mean better. The state is ready to even look after me for as long as I'm married. But if I'm not, then it doesn't want to deal with me. My perspective was : I don't have to be looked after, I don't want to benefit from anything that I have not contributed into, I will look after myself as a newcomer here but how can I ensure that in this process, I am not asked to separate from my husband as long as I am not a burden on this state (this is where his Hartz Vier enters the equation). That felt really sad. The rürupt also makes sense now, if this extension can be more than once. (Though I really think we should be able to achieve something better for us.)

 

It's OK if I am getting de facto residence as long as I am married. This is exactly why I asked if this residence is renewed over and over. Is there a risk in this for any individual? yes, individual risk. My spouse may choose to divorce me any time and I will have to start life all over again somewhere. That is left to me to decide. Germany is responsible for its citizens only. Who can say anything against it? Technically, it would increase birth rate. Not my business, I will not have children. I am sure a country can calculate costs better than me:) 

 

I would like to thank you for your clear discussion (and patience.) This only helps me to understand better. If we are married, the state is ready to give me more than I actually feel entitled personally. If we are not together, everyone goes their way. I'm completely OK with whatever rule there is as long as I understand what is awaiting me. And the ideal would be to be functional in this society so that we don't have these troubles. I intend to do that. I can get a license as a translator, start a company, etc etc. Only I may not manage this in three years because one year can be memorizing artikels for me. Or I may achieve it but then temporarily lose it. I was just trying to understand the worst case scenario and now I know it. Thank you for clarifying it. Other than this, like many people have explained here about menial jobs etc, it is possible to achieve what the state wants from us. It is not a super high bar.   

 

I know my posts may have sounded too individualistic because I keep on focusing "I", "my income." This is because I have been trying to find out how "I" can fulfill the criteria that is ultimately about me as an immigrant. My idea was never to keep my money to myself but to be able to document that I am self-sufficient as I thought Germany expected me to do (based on what I read). Like OK, we are a Hartz Vier family and you ask me if I have been self-sufficent myself and here are my papers, yes I am. Whatever income we had, I brought in this bit. But now I see that Germany sees it as the family. That's the confusion. I wish it had been clearer in documents about residence. Something like "you as a family". So I don't obsess about documenting this. What matters is what we have as family. And yes, I focused on his Hartz Vier. This is because I was told that he would lose his Hartz Vier because of me. He doesn't lose anything actually. The state is there to compensate for what we don't have. And I felt like a burden on my potential spouse as well. I mean who likes to hear that their spouse will lose their rights because of you? (Misinformation obviously and no need for guilt:) 

 

On another level (which is only an abstract discussion) I really believe citizens are losing certain rights. Elderly German people in my country are being directly affected by loss of some health rights, feeling helpless and are voicing their concerns. We can all have our opinions on what is expected from a welfare state, but that would be more of an intellectual, abstract discussion that has no relevance to my situation from my perspective.

 

I would like to thank you again. members of TT Germany have helped me grasp it in a way that would be really difficult to achieve unless I sat with a lawyer for half a day and received training. Thank you for this. I appreciate it.   

 

 

 

 

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now