Search
Contact
19.07.2019 | KPMG Law Insights

Company pension plan – double contribution

Double contribution (BVerfG, decision dated June 27, 2018, 1 BvR 100/15 and 1 BvR 249/15)

By Christine Hansen and Jean-Baptiste Abel

In two decisions, the Federal Constitutional Court ruled that benefits from pension fund commitments that were continued by the employee with his or her own contributions after leaving the employment relationship are not subject to the obligation to pay contributions to the pensioners’ health insurance if the employee has become the policyholder of the continued contract. The Federal Constitutional Court has thus extended to pension fund commitments the legal situation that had existed since the ruling of September 28, 2010 (1 BvR 1660/08) for privately continued direct insurance policies.
The gKV-Spitzenverband has announced in a circular letter that it will accept repayments up to the statute of limitations on a fair basis, and has announced in another letter that it will also apply the BVerfG ruling to pension fund provisions. It remains to be seen how the requirement of being a policyholder, which is alien to the pension fund, is to be dealt with here.
It is still unclear whether there will be a further push to abolish the so-called double contribution system – the contribution of company pensions in individual cases in both the vesting and pension phases – by way of a major solution. In the Federal Government, the Bundestag and the Bundesrat, there have been attempts from various sides (for example, the introduction of an allowance instead of an exemption limit and a return to half the contribution rate), but ultimately the high expected costs are a major hurdle. Since the Federal Constitutional Court expressly has no reservations about the legality of double contribution, the debate is likely to drag on for some time.

Conclusion: The BVerfG has retained the requirement that the employee who has left the company must become an insurance policyholder in order to benefit from the more favorable situation under contribution law. Employers should therefore ensure that they swiftly enable departing employees who wish to continue the provision with their own contributions to enter into the policyholder position in order to avert possible liability for damages. For employers, the double contribution generally has no direct impact. However, the debate and reporting in consumer magazines are increasingly eroding the esteem in which company pensions are held by employees.

Explore #more

07.11.2025 | Deal Notifications

KPMG Law and KPMG advise Diehl Defence on the acquisition of the Tauber Group

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH (KPMG Law) and KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft (KPMG) advised Diehl Defence on the acquisition of the Tauber Group. KPMG Law provided legal…

07.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Changes to the H-1B visa and their consequences for US hiring and secondment practices

President Trump’s administration has introduced two significant changes to the highly popular H-1B visa program for skilled workers: The previous random lottery will be replaced…

07.11.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law Statement on HAUFE: Confusion surrounding the EU Deforestation Regulation – and what companies should do now

Possibly, perhaps, under certain circumstances, the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) will not be binding for large and medium-sized enterprises on December 30, 2025 and for…

06.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

External personnel: authorities tighten checks with AI support

AI is a blessing for many companies, but it can also quickly become a curse, especially when authorities use the technology to uncover legal violations…

06.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Deforestation regulation – simplification instead of postponement?

In September, the EU Commission wanted to postpone the EUDR deforestation regulation. On October 21, 2025, it published a comprehensive proposal to simplify the EUDR

05.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Employer of Record now not subject to authorization after all – change of heart at BA

On October 1, 2025, the Federal Employment Agency (BA) updated its technical directives and made a U-turn with regard to the so-called employer-of-record model: In…

03.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

CO₂ contracts for difference: Participation in the preliminary procedure is a prerequisite for funding

Companies can apply for funding in the preliminary procedure for the climate protection contracts program until 1 December 2025. The funding from the Federal Ministry…

29.10.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Fund Risk Limitation Act and Location Promotion Act create new scope for infrastructure funds

As the federal government’s special infrastructure fund of 500 billion euros will probably not be enough to finance Germany’s roads, networks and the energy transition,…

29.10.2025 | Deal Notifications

KPMG Law advises management board of Nürnberger Beteiligungs-AG on sale to Vienna Insurance Group

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft (KPMG Law) provided legal advice to the Management Board of Nürnberger Beteiligungs-AG throughout the entire public takeover process by Vienna Insurance Group…

29.10.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

BAG on pair comparison: How employers should deal with salary differences

The Federal Labor Court (BAG) has issued another landmark decision on equal pay. In its ruling of October 23, 2025 (Ref. 8 AZR 300/24),…

Contact

Christine Hansen

Senior Manager
Leiterin Betriebliche Altersversorgung

Heidestraße 58
10557 Berlin

Tel.: +49 30 530199150
christinehansen@kpmg-law.com

© 2024 KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH, associated with KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, a public limited company under German law and a member of the global KPMG organisation of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a Private English Company Limited by Guarantee. All rights reserved. For more details on the structure of KPMG’s global organisation, please visit https://home.kpmg/governance.

 KPMG International does not provide services to clients. No member firm is authorised to bind or contract KPMG International or any other member firm to any third party, just as KPMG International is not authorised to bind or contract any other member firm.

Scroll