Is my Dutch health insurance sufficient if I live in Thailand, but still work in the Netherlands?
Dear readers,
Even though we are moving to Thailand, I will continue to 'work' in the Netherlands: I have non-location-specific work and only need a laptop, an internet connection and professional knowledge. The BV I work for (and of which I am a co-shareholder) agrees with that AS situation.
Now I read on the Netherlands worldwide:
(quote) “If you work in the Netherlands, you are obliged to take out health insurance in the Netherlands. Even if you live abroad. So you can simply keep your Dutch health insurance. If you live in a treaty country, you must register with an insurer in your country of residence.” (unquote).
Now I know that Thailand does not have a healthcare treaty with the Netherlands, but I will keep the current insurance where I have taken the module for - especially in Thailand - more expensive emergency care and for non-urgent care I hope that I will be able to travel back to The Netherlands, where I regularly have to go for 'work' (meetings, trade fairs, etc.).
Now the question: does this structure provide sufficient certainty of decent care?
O... I have no need for reactions that I am not allowed to work on my visa (non-O Thai marriage with annual extensions of residence period), as the physical difference between work and recreation is not visible to anyone...
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
John
Editors: Do you have a question for the readers of Thailandblog? Use it contact form..
Johannes, in which country are you/are you registered? I think a lot depends on that.
But from your question I suspect that you are not registered in the Netherlands. And then, do you work IN NL? No, you work in TH, although you are in NL from time to time for consultations, but not to live.
For complete certainty, I would put your question in writing to your health insurer, because only then will you get certainty and have it on paper.
Furthermore, you write 'we'. I suspect that the construction you want will not apply to partners and/or children who go to TH, unless they also work 'in the Netherlands'...
I think he should check with the SVB?
Editorial staff, and Johannes, I don't know if you can go to the SVB yourself for this.
The insurance obligation for the ZVW depends on the insurance obligation for the WLZ and it is still uncertain to me whether Johannes and family members are registered in the Netherlands. I expect that when Johannes explains his situation and that of the family members to the health insurer, he will assess the insurance obligation and, if necessary, ask the SVB for advice. This is an issue that will depend on the actual situation of John and family members.
The SVB can also do that check later and decide to end the health policy. This was once written about in this blog and one of the readers litigated about it; he then sent me that file.
I think Johannes himself should sound the alarm; it can save big claims and a lot of misery in the future.
I did a quick search and you can certainly ask the SVB for an opinion yourself.
Oh yes, and in addition to my previous email, I do not know whether reading the SVB is in accordance with the privacy regulations. In short, a question to the AP (Dutch Data Protection Authority) is not without a chance.
I don't think so. People contribute to or respond to this public blog and everyone is free to read it and draw conclusions from it or not.
Dear Johannes, Erik, Peter, Ger-Korat,
The path I propose is a WOO request. both at the SVB (content0) and at the AP (Privacy). My club (de wilde tiger.nl), in accordance with art. 3:305a, would like to make such a WOO request. You can call +31 (0) 6 10124086. I have also an NVJ press card (168845) for the use of the forwarding obligation (art. 2.3.1 General Administrative Law Act)
Han, WOO request about what? About John's question? Then you step outside this item and you may damage Johannes' privacy. And does he benefit from a hardening of views on his problem? Now he is still anonymous and, if I read correctly, has not yet gone to Thailand.
Or about the suspected 'watching' in the media? Nice and important item! But go ahead and we'll hear what people think. As long as it doesn't cost me anything, I'm fine with everything... But how do you prove that watching?
Han, what privacy? Most commenters here only mention a first name and you can suck it up. Moreover, these types of media are public; everyone can access it and read it if you master the language. Furthermore, I think the SVB has something else to do than scrutinizing numerous media for irregularities...
You pay payroll tax in the Netherlands and then you are entitled to health insurance. Everything you describe is correct when it comes to health insurance. If you have any questions, you can contact your health insurer, but I don't think it is necessary, CZ, for example, also indicates it this way, to name just one. You are even entitled to healthcare allowance if you qualify for it depending on your income. Google living abroad working in the Netherlands; then you will come across some sites with “care” in the name in which it is also stated.
Ger, that is very simplistic.
You pay payroll tax in the Netherlands and then you have health insurance.
That is far from correct because all retirees in Thailand with AOW pay payroll tax in the Netherlands, but unfortunately are not entitled to health insurance. criteria, lives abroad for longer than 8 months.
The criterion is working in the Netherlands, which entails income tax liability (first wage tax). You are also insured for the WLZ, Erik Kuijpers also mentions this, and automatically for the health insurance. First Google my references to: healthcare living abroad working in the Netherlands and you will come across information. Note that the health insurers themselves also provide the information, such as the CZ I mentioned. If you live outside the Netherlands and no longer work in the Netherlands, for example you are a state pensioner, you will pay wage tax, but the residence principle applies where.
My first reaction started with 'you' and was a direct response to Johannes. It was not my intention to include AOW pensioners living abroad who also pay payroll tax, because that is a different situation.
Dear Johannes, Erik, Peter, Ger-Korat,
1. Do not inquire with SVB because the first thing that happens is you will receive a letter stating that you have emigrated according to SVB and your insurer will immediately be instructed to cancel your policy, possibly even retroactively to a date that suits SVB best. in a legal sense.
2. Be particularly careful with your communications on Thaiblog because SVB is reading along!
3. The fact that you are probably a major shareholder of the BV, or general manager, determines that there is no power relationship, so according to SVB you are not employed; the fact that you receive “wage” means nothing. This means that you do not work for a company established in the Netherlands, according to SVB, and this is a reason for SVB to deny you residency and thus cancel your obligation to have health insurance.
Erik mentions the file I sent him a few years ago. I've been fighting with the scum since 2015. Initially, the three-judge court in The Hague agreed with me; I work for a commercial foundation that I founded 3 years ago with my wife, who died in 34. The foundation was established by notarial deed, registered with the Chamber of Commerce in the association and foundation register, the tax authorities have agreed to the fact that no premiums and LB are withheld, income is included as special income in the tax return and income tax and premium are charged on this. levied. Until then everything is kosher, but not for SVB.
2 months before the court hearing in The Hague in 2018, SVB instructed the FBTO to cancel my policy with retroactive effect of more than a year. I have a rather extensive medical file, I had just had a tumor removed from my only kidney during a 5-hour kidney operation, so I cannot do without health insurance (I was 77 at the time). In order to create a substantial buffer, this action by SVB forced me to urgently sell my flat, which I had had renovated for self-care until old age. I lost my Dutch address and only had a temporary postal address. Thank you, said SVB, I have got hold of you now, you see, you have emigrated, but the court thought differently and after lengthy questioning they ruled against SVB and the case had to be reversed.
SVB did not appeal within the set period of 90 days, so end of story, I thought. Not so, after 7 months SVB set aside the ruling due to a mistake by the court. That is possible in the Netherlands!!! As a citizen you will be thrown in jail, taken hostage or have your bank account looted, but yes, SVB is the government, so it is inviolable.
SVB used 2 arguments: 1st you no longer lived in the Netherlands at the time of the hearing and 2nd you work for a non-existent company, so you no longer have ties with the Netherlands. Of course, SVB did not mention that the hearing was originally scheduled for April 2018 but was postponed until October, so at the time of the appeal I was indeed a resident, but more importantly, while the appeal was pending, SVB canceled my residency 2 months before the hearing.
I asked the court for advice and all they could do was take a formal position, we have done justice and that's the end of it. Toodleo. You can file a case again.
So I did, again in The Hague and through the fanfare I learned that I had a very strong case. At the hearing, for which I had traveled 10.000 km, SVB declared the court incompetent because I no longer formally lived in The Hague and they wanted to live in Amsterdam anyway because they had already lost in The Hague (literal statement by the SVB lawyer duo) I was outside again within 15 minutes. If you do not have a formal place of residence, Amsterdam is recommended, and it also happens to be where the SVB head office is located. We were in the middle of the Covid period and eventually the case came up during a Skype hearing. I submitted 21 points to the court about demonstrable trickery and deception by SVB during the period from spring 2015.
The judge in Amsterdam had either had preliminary consultations, or sympathized with SVB for social/political reasons, but 1 point from my argumentation was addressed, in which SVB, who could not log in so “participated” by telephone, was allowed to speak for a disproportionately long time. Verdict, you are not right. The 3rd case will follow in May because FBTO has indeed given me a policy, SVB has tried to cancel it and still refuses to confirm my residency, even though I have had a permanent address in the Netherlands for almost 4 years. I now have 5 pages of photos of me with our ambassadors, companies, the King and Queen, the Ruer of Dubai, the Governor of Mecca and Jeddah, installations in NL, Europe, Africa, Asia, meetings, seminars, guest lectures at universities of the non-existent company and hope that the court in Zwolle is not biased. I am now almost 83 and am not giving up in my battle with the 4th power.
Incidentally, a letter to the competent minister was never answered, letters to the factions in the House of Representatives were only confirmed by the small, non-governmental parties, the National Ombudsman made two telephone calls to SVB during the period after the rejection of the statement and refusing to answer me.
The 2nd Chamber committee replied that they would not interpellate the minister, but had noted my letter as seen.
Johannes, I wish you the best of luck, but you will lose your residency, so insurance if you don't do things differently.
Sincerely,
Thick
SVB if you have read the above, warm regards to your corrupted Board of Directors of ex-politicians.
Yes Dick,
SVB is watching, all over the world!
There is nothing wrong with that, because they also protect the Dutch.
Preferably those who live in the Netherlands.
If you set up a “foundation”, their hair will stand on end and you will receive special attention.
This is also the case in your case. It eats away at you, I believe so.
I do not have a foundation, but I established a pension company in 1983.
And that is the downside, as a result I now pay a lot of tax on my income from it.
But I knew that in advance.
And hope for a good outcome for you. But I doubt.
You have not paid payroll tax and there is no employment relationship or situation such as employee and employer. After all, then the basis for being insured disappears. You don't mention all these points, but that is precisely what the right to health insurance is all about. The fact that someone is a co-shareholder as Johannes mentions does not make him the main shareholder, anyone can buy shares in a company that employs you and that does not make you a director or major shareholder, but a co-shareholder.
Ger-Korat, things really work differently at a BV. There is an obligation to offer existing shareholders who want to sell (part of) their package; you offer it to the other shareholders first. Only then are outsiders discussed. 'Anyone can buy' applies to listed funds.
Small tip for eliciting a response from the minister/2nd chamber. Use the so-called forwarding obligation (art 2.3.1 ju 2.3.2 AWB) and correspond with the government via the press officers. Nowhere in the law does it state that you have to be from the press to make use of the forwarding obligation. And every civil servant must comply with the General Administrative Law Act will forward a document that he/she receives to the correct official (and even Minister Rutte is a civil servant). That is why I send my letters to the press officer, but I always do iaa [email protected] (that is Rutte's office) You will probably have to file an objection and appeal (but chatgpt and my pension makes me patient) And in the event of an appeal, Rutte also has to pay something. The RVD often chooses this because paying is sometimes cheaper than solving the problem. And oh yes, the SVB is a government institution and can therefore also be involved in a WOO procedure (of course you need a laptop and ChatGpt)
See also my responses regarding a WOO request to SVB and a complaint to the AP (Personal Data Authority) regarding investigating the possibility and infringement of privacy
Johannes's incomplete information and pulling this item out of proportion leads to an incorrect position. Look again at Johannes' first line: 'We are moving to Thailand', followed by 'The Netherlands, where I regularly have to go for etc.'.
What does that mean? Johannes is then no longer a resident. Nor does he write that he lives in the Netherlands for four months and in Thailand for eight months. Or he must commit fraud with his registration in the basic administration, but I do not assume that there is any malicious intent.
A condition for a health policy is that you are a resident within the framework of the WLZ. Now there are some side doors such as people working on the continental shelf, in international shipping, deployed diplomatic personnel and military personnel and a few other groups. And, for health insurance, people who live outside the Netherlands but work in the Netherlands.
Working in the Netherlands. What is that then? Do Johannes' visits count as 'IN NL' work? Because he is indeed in the Netherlands several times a year. Does that entitle him to a health insurance policy? Or does the law mean 'cross-border workers' who live in Germany and other nearby countries and work in the Netherlands (think of Philips Eindhoven and DSM Geleen)? Say it. I don't think so, by the way.
Johannes' situation is not standard and hence my advice to submit this to his health insurance. He is not a resident, I think that is certain, but does he fall under the exceptions?
As far as his family, partner and/or children are concerned, it seems clear to me: they must take out insurance in Thailand. I don't know whether children aged 18 and 19 can join the policy with one of their parents (the age of majority in Thailand is 20).
Now I have a quote from the Netherlands worldwide:
What should I do with my health insurance if I live abroad but continue to work in the Netherlands?
If you work in the Netherlands, you are obliged to take out health insurance in the Netherlands. Even if you live abroad. So you can simply keep your Dutch health insurance. If you live in a treaty country, you must register with an insurer in your country of residence.
It is a good idea to ask your health insurer how you are insured abroad.
end quote.
Well, there doesn't have to be any discussion at all about whether you are, for example, in the Netherlands and working for 1 month or longer and what that work entails and where in the Netherlands and on your PC on your bed or in the boardroom. The concept of work is not necessary as long as you get paid for it and you owe income tax on it in the Netherlands.
And in addition, a reference to the insurer such as CZ who simply agree with my description. I don't read any conditions (!) as to how long or how often you have to work or be present in the Netherlands, but only working in the Netherlands in general, not regulated other than what working hours and such, and therefore good for those like Johannes the questioner.
Indeed, there is no need for any discussion at all. Working in the Netherlands is nothing more than having the work done in the Netherlands. So you must be present in the Netherlands.
There are two exceptions: cross-border workers in Belgium and cross-border workers in Germany. This is described in a European regulation.
Deregistration in the Netherlands = end of Zvw and Wlz insurance. Income tax has absolutely nothing to do with this! For more information, it is best to contact the Cak in The Hague.
Let's just re-read the text of the Netherlands Worldwide:
If you work in the Netherlands, you are required to have health insurance in the Netherlands
Then another publication from the central government: Anyone who lives or works in the Netherlands must take out basic insurance...
I don't think it can be said any clearer.
And then for Erik Kuijpers and others the link with data from the health insurer CZ in which everything is clearly stated:
https://www.cz.nl/zorgverzekering/buitenland/wonen-in-buitenland
Thanks to Google of course, all information can be found within seconds.
Anyone who lives or works in the Netherlands must take out basic insurance...
In both cases you are physically present in the Netherlands, and in both cases you are required to be registered in a municipality. The day after you leave the Netherlands you will be deregistered and your health insurance will end. That's just the way it is. I hope it's clear now.
You are only required to be registered if you have been staying in the Netherlands for 4 consecutive months. You can stay and work for 3 months and then leave (for example seasonal workers) and then no registration is required. For example, if you work and stay in the Netherlands for 3 months: no registration is required, but basic insurance is mandatory because you could have a work accident on day 1, become ill on day 2 or have to go to the doctor on day 3; that is what health insurance is intended for.
As has been written before: the government, the Netherlands worldwide, and the health insurer all write that working alone is enough (and then you live abroad), what is so unclear about that?
Ger, why do you think people from outside the EU need to have medical insurance if they come here for a maximum of 90 days? That's right, before an accident. And for an industrial accident, the company has insurance, not the company employee or visitors.
You work for a Dutch company based in Thailand. Then you don't work IN the Netherlands but outside it. So you are not covered by the basic health care safety net (insurance) of the Netherlands. If ASLM employs 2 people in Washington or Beijing who live and work there and sometimes drop by in the Netherlands for work, those people (Dutch, American, Chinese, or other) are not immediately covered by the Dutch healthcare law, are they? These people will have to arrange this themselves and the employer will also have to properly arrange his company insurance regarding personnel and the like. Seems more than logical to me. I'll leave it at this. If you are still in doubt, write to the insurer, government or lawyer specialized in accidents/insurance across the border.
Yes, very clearly, “who lives/works *in* the Netherlands”, and not who works *for* the Netherlands('s company). It seems very clear to me that you have to be physically in the Netherlands.
All texts say that, so I don't understand why this is being overlooked so much? I therefore agree with Erik's first response: if you really want to be sure, ask your health insurer in writing.
Ger-Korat, do you please have a link to CZ's announcement?
Here is the link
https://www.cz.nl/zorgverzekering/buitenland/wonen-in-buitenland
A site with clarity.
But now the question: does living in Thailand, where you work on the PC for a company in the Netherlands, and for which company you are in the Netherlands a few times a year, entitle you to a health insurance policy because of this 'working in the Netherlands'?
Ger-Korat says yes, I say, with others, no. Now you can act like your nose bleeds and try to keep that policy, but since it could involve a lot of money, if I were an interested party, I would first be fully informed. And that is still my advice to topic starter for himself and his hitchhiking children up to 18.
Dear Erik,
Thank you for your responses, not just this one. I'm only responding to this because this is the last of your series of meaningful contributions. I attribute the fact that many other answers are not relevant or applicable at all to my incomplete information in the question.
That's why - and also because you hinted at this - some necessary additions and clarifications:
Firstly: I am going to live in Thailand (with my Thai wife and without children) and will therefore deregister in the Netherlands and register in the RNI register. Secondly: I will remain employed by a Dutch BV, in which I also have a minority interest. Thirdly: I will only be in the Netherlands for a maximum of 30-60 days per year and not just to work. So I certainly don't physically work in the Netherlands. But nevertheless..:
In a search for sufficient certainty about health care cost coverage, I came across information in the Netherlands worldwide that I can keep my current health insurance.
Moreover, I had already asked the health insurer for advice; they (Zilveren Kruis) referred to a “decision tree” (https://www.zilverenkruis.nl/consumenten/service/buitenland/wonen-werken-studeren) which I walked through and found:
> What is or will be your situation? > I live abroad but receive wages from the Netherlands > You are obliged to take out Dutch health insurance. This is possible at Zilveren Kruis.
So 'yes' twice (!) On the other hand, if that rule is intended for cross-border workers and other special situations indicated by you, then it is a 'no'. .
Ultimately, I'm going to follow the advice of you and Peter (editors) and contact SVB: . I leave the scaremongering about "watching" and nonsensical WOO requests for what they are: I have nothing to hide but just want clarity.
Again thanks a lot,
John
Dear Erik, this is a second response to your message. Now with additional information:
Further searching gave me (according to my interpretation..) a third “yes”: https://www.hetcak.nl/zorgverzekering-buitenland/werknemers/
with the most important - applicable - paragraph:
(quote):
“Do you telecommute between 25 and 50% from your country of residence? Then you can remain insured in the Netherlands upon request, if you meet certain conditions. You can submit such a request to the Social Insurance Bank (SVB).
The most important conditions:
• You are an employee.
• You live outside the Netherlands.
• You only work for an employer established in the Netherlands.
• You telework between 25 and 50% of your working time in your country of residence.
“(unquote)
It seems that I could have found the answers to my own question elsewhere, but without everyone's contribution (well, almost everyone's...) I would have found the right path more difficult, so thank you all very much for your input!
John.
Johannes, with a 'yes' from the health insurer and soon from the SVB on a correct representation of the future facts, you are covered against claims. You can cover the (sometimes) higher nursing and treatment costs than in the Netherlands with an additional module, but you probably already know that. I cannot judge from your message whether your wife can also take a Dutch health insurance policy with her.
Your question has now been answered and, thanks to this unique blog with many people with experience and knowledge, we have all become wiser for future questions. Good luck in Thailand!
But Johannes, you wrote earlier that you are only in the Netherlands for a short time (30 to 60 days) and not just to work. So you almost always work from Thailand for a Dutch company, right? And that doesn't get you to the "between 25 and 50 percent of the time I work from my country of residence (Thailand)", which is more like 80-90% of the time. Then you're not covered by it, are you?
But be sure to check with the SVB and clearly state where you work, how (remotely), and how long per week/month/year you work for the company in Thailand and the Netherlands. If you also state that you have a minority interest (percentage?) in the BV, then you must have a more than clear outline of your situation and therefore receive a sensible and concrete answer to your question from people who should know the law professionally. Good luck.
Thank you Rob,
I will certainly ask the SVB for a written response to ensure that it is covered, with all cards open on the table; I don't want to be unpleasantly surprised. But 40% Thailand, 20% the Netherlands and 40% rest of the world is also possible, right? I already work (not a full-time 9-to-5 job, but about three hours a day on average) where and when necessary.
Now that we still live in the Netherlands, we have been touring Europe for weeks, almost months, in the summer and work continues as normal. I think I will almost certainly be a 'digital nomad' soon, and in addition to Europe for a while, I will not only spend the rest of the year in the -then- living country of Thailand. There are still many interesting countries in SE Asia.
Sincerely,
John
I think that Johannes starts from the fact that his wish to be assured leads to reality. Why not inform the health insurer and SVB right from the start? And the results were passed on to Thailandblog. What do you mean looking for confirmation of “thinking that it will be the way I want it to be”? How knowledgeable are readers regarding the use of Dutch health insurance outside the EU/EEA? The CAK and CZ sites refer to foreign countries as far as treaty countries are concerned. Thailand is not even a treaty country for health insurance. A second fallacy lies in the fact that teleworking is permitted for a maximum of 2% of the working time. The other 50% (and that is at least 50 working days per year) he is expected to be present at his Dutch workplace. Johannes, however, indicates that he will only be in the Netherlands for 110-30 days and that he still has to work up to date. Anyway: he says he will inquire with the SVB and I assume that he will be good enough to share the results with us.
If you are deregistered from the Netherlands, you cannot get health insurance in the Netherlands. Some insurance companies do not know or do nothing with it and simply continue to collect premiums based on their own experience.
Contact the SVB and they will tell you how and what.
Joop
As far as Peer is concerned: entrepreneurs' pension
The tax has been allocated to Thailand from our own BV
For tax residents, only Thailand is authorized to levy taxes.
As for the healthcare discussion; agree with Kuipers