hmgaudecker
commented
3 months ago Not sure. Seems to me like this is a definitional thing and we can just keep it as is -- we need that definition from SGB II in order to create bg_ids, right?
I don't know yet how Einstandsgemeinschaft (SGB XII) relates to Bedarfsgemeinschaft (SGB II) other than the fact that in the latter, there needs to be at least one person that is able to work.
Sounds like it is fine to run with the bg_id for SGB XII as well.
Sorry to revive this discussion again:
Status Quo
In our current implementation, Einstandsgemeinschaft refers to couples who live together (specified via
p_id_einstandspartner). This follows the definition in SGB II: §7 Abs. 3a SGB II defines a Einstandsgemeinschaft as two people living together with a mutual willingness to take care for each other (so no children included here).Here, the Einstandsgemeinschaft is part of the Bedarfsgemeinschaft. It seems like the purpose of the Bedarfsgemeinschaft in SGB II is to summarize couples who are not necessarily married under one term (afaik there is no connection to transfers beyond the membership in a Bedarfsgemeinschaft).
In SGB XII, the Einstandsgemeinschaft is the group that is entitled for some transfer and includes underage children who live in the same household and cannot cover their own needs. See, for example, this definition of BMAS.
Implications for GETTSIM / Bug
Calculation of SGB XII transfers (e.g. Grundsicherung im Alter) are wrong if there are children in the household under 18 who cannot cover their own needs.
Suggested Change
It seems to me that all occurrences of
_egin the code should actually refer to the SGB XII term, not the SGB II term (because they are used for SGB XII transfers). Hence, we would need to adjust the creation ofeg_idaccordingly.I don't know yet how Einstandsgemeinschaft (SGB XII) relates to Bedarfsgemeinschaft (SGB II) other than the fact that in the latter, there needs to be at least one person that is able to work.