IIt has been demonstrated that the algorithm of the family allowance fund penalizes the most vulnerable among social assistance recipients (“In the life of Juliette, single, precarious mother and target of the CAF algorithm”, The world of December 4, 2023). But this observation is not limited to the algorithmic question.
The problem raised is deeper, as shown by the case of Juliette, described by the investigation of World. Single mother, recipient of active solidarity income (RSA), she must, after verification, reimburse the “income of undetermined origin”a priori the family assistance received from his brothers and sisters “so she could visit their father, who had fallen ill”a transfer received for his birthday, and the income from a few undeclared hours of cleaning.
The RSA is in fact a so-called “differential” benefit: all income must be declared and is then deducted from the premium paid to beneficiaries. The resources taken into account include earned income, replacement income, but also alimony, social and family benefits, inheritances and donations, gambling winnings, rents from rented accommodation, the rental value of unrented accommodation, capital income, and fictitious income from non-productive assets such as life insurance contracts, imputed at 3% of their market value.
Let us note in passing that these fictitious incomes are not taken into account in the income base for income tax or the cap on the real estate wealth tax (IFI), even though these households have a priori fewer liquidity problems than RSA recipients…
First victim
The RSA is also a so-called “subsidiary” benefit: the applicant must assert rights to other social benefits and maintenance claims before asserting their rights to the RSA. This creates impossible situations for recipients, even sincere ones: if they receive family assistance in an emergency situation, a boiler that breaks down or a sick relative, they must declare this assistance… which will be entirely deducted from the allowance paid!
No need for artificial intelligence to understand that, in this context, there will be more fraud detected among the most vulnerable people. The situation described is that of a spiral of poverty fueled by a strictly asymmetrical technocracy, which only seeks fraud and not non-recourse.
You have 57.16% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.