Totalization Agreements Countries

In recent years, attempts have been made to advance legislative proposals to amend Section 233 to broaden the scope of aggregation to the benefit of U.S. interests, while maintaining the program`s traditional focus on actuarial balance and fiscal prudence. However, such legislative proposals have not gained much strength and, to date, aggregation partnerships focus on Europe with a few notable exceptions. Credits acquired in the country with a tabonization agreement can be transferred to another party (i.e.: From Great Britain to the United States or vice versa), if a duplicate does not have a sufficient number of credits in one of the countries to qualify for benefits. While they are transferred to another country`s social security system, these credits do not reduce the number of loans accumulated in another country – so you may be entitled to receive social security benefits from both schemes once you reach retirement age. Provisions to remove double coverage for workers are similar in all U.S. agreements. Each sets a basic rule that refers to a worker`s place of employment. Under this fundamental “rule of territoriality,” an employee who would otherwise be covered by both the U.S.

system and a foreign system is subject exclusively to the coverage laws of the country in which he or she works. International social security agreements are beneficial both for those who are currently working and for those whose careers have ended. For current workers, the agreements remove double contributions that they might otherwise make to the social security plans of the United States and another country. For people who have worked both in the U.S. and abroad and are now retired, disabled, or dead, agreements often result in the payment of benefits that the worker or their family members would not otherwise be entitled to. In 1977, labor immigration patterns were very different from those of 2018, and most U.S. trade and multinational relations then focused on Western Europe. Therefore, Article 233 was adapted to the social security systems of the time in Western Europe. The first two agreements concluded by the United States with Italy and West Germany preceded the adoption of Section 233. That is why this scheme has been designed taking into account the social security systems of these two countries, which have already been subject to control. Both countries had traditional Bismarck payment systems that covered virtually all of their workforce. Section 233 provides that the President may enter into aggregation agreements only with countries with general social security schemes, which provide for periodic payments of benefits or the actuarial equivalent on account of their age, disability or death.

Aggregation agreements tolerate derogations from the above-mentioned rules for determining the social security scheme of a given worker. If both countries agree to make an exception for a single worker, the country that has agreed to cover the worker in question shall cover that worker accordingly. An example of an exception would be to extend a short-term stay in a country by a few months beyond the maximum period of five years provided for the application of the self-employed rule. .

FacebookTwitterGoogle+TumblrPinterestShare