Overview of case law
on basic income support, social assistance, the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act, basic income support/citizen's allowance, and employment promotion law
Last updated: July 12, 2026
Editor: Detlef Brock
Publisher: Tacheles Legal News Ticker
1. Decisions of the State Social Courts on the New Basic Income Support/Citizen's Allowance under the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II)
1.1 – LSG Hamburg, Judgment of 16.04.2026 – L 4 AS 253/25 –
Topic
: On the prerequisites for a so-called zero determination of citizen's allowance benefits according to § 41a SGB II.
Guiding principles
- For the final determination of the benefits granted pursuant to Section 7 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II), the beneficiary is obliged to provide evidence of the facts relevant to the benefit in accordance with Sections 60 et seq. of the German Social Code, Book I (SGB I).
- If he refuses to submit complete bank statements and complete documentation of business income and expenses to the benefit provider, the latter may, in accordance with Section 41a Paragraph 3 of the German Social Code, Book II (SGB II), determine that no benefits were payable during the relevant benefit period.
- The reduction to zero must take place within one year of the end of the approval period for which benefits were provisionally approved.
Source:
LSG Hamburg
Note by Detlef Brock: With the introduction of basic income support (formerly citizen's income) on July 1, 2026 , a strict deadline for submitting required documents was implemented. If self-employed individuals fail to submit the requested documents by the deadline after the end of the approval period, their entitlement to benefits for that period is permanently forfeited.
Previously, according to the Federal Social Court's jurisprudence, deficiencies could be rectified during the legal proceedings by submitting the required documents later. Anyone who submits necessary evidence late risks having their provisionally approved benefits permanently reduced to zero and having any benefits already paid reclaimed in full.
Tip: If you are unable to obtain the required documents in time, be sure to submit before the deadline expires .
1.2 – LSG North Rhine-Westphalia, decision of 01.06.2026 – L 2 AS 727/26 B ER –
Topic:
On the requirements of Section 65a SGG.
The email-to-fax and web-to-fax methods do not meet the requirements for the legally required written form.
Decision:
No entitlement to basic income support/citizen's allowance in the appeal procedure if the submission is not formally valid.
A document submitted by the applicant via the fax service “simple-fax.de” using an email-to-fax or web-to-fax procedure, which does not show either a handwritten or a scanned handwritten signature, does not meet the minimum requirements for a legally valid complaint.
Source
www.socialgerichtsabilities.de
2. Decisions of the social courts on the new basic income support/citizen's allowance
2.1 – SG Hannover, Judgment of 20.03.2026 – S 31 AS 1755/25 –
Topic:
Consideration of repayment rates when purchasing a private solar power system
Repayment installments for a photovoltaic system are not tax-deductible. Income from operating a photovoltaic system must be reported to the job center; otherwise, substantial repayments may be demanded.
The decision
states that repayment installments do not constitute necessary expenses (advertising costs) related to income generation within the meaning of Section 11b Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 No. 5 SGB II.
Regarding the adjustment of income from the rental of residential property, the Federal Social Court has already ruled that repayment payments – unlike interest on debt – are not deductible expenses under Section 11b Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 No. 5 of the German Social Code, Book II (BSG, Judgment of 17 July 2024 – B 7 AS 7/23 R).
Anyone receiving basic income support who conceals income from operating a photovoltaic system from the job center must expect that their benefit approval notices will be revoked retroactively.
In this particular case, this resulted in a claim for reimbursement of approximately 21,500 euros.
Source:
SG Hannover
3. Decisions on employment promotion law (SGB III)
3.1 – LSG Schleswig-Holstein, Judgment of 14 November 2025 – L 3 AL 24/23 –
Appeal pending before the Federal Social Court: B 11 AL 3/26 R
Issue of
waiting period for leaving employment due to termination agreement – transfer to a transfer company – important reason
Unemployment benefit I: A transfer to a temporary employment agency can, in principle, constitute a valid reason for unemployment. However, this was denied in the present case because no specific redundancy notice had been announced.
Principle
: A valid reason excluding the waiting period due to job abandonment pursuant to Section 159 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 in conjunction with Sentence 2 No. 1 of the German Social Code, Book III (SGB III), due to an impending dismissal for operational reasons by the employer, does not exist if the employee concludes a termination agreement with severance pay and the prospect of temporary employment in a transfer company after having registered to leave the employment relationship due to staff reduction measures by the employer within the framework of a voluntary procedure (matching procedure) and is subsequently listed on a separation list that can be expanded at any time.
Source
www.socialgerichtsabilities.de
3.2 – BSG, Judgment of 05.03.2026 – B 11 AL 1/25 R –
Legal question:
Is the accrual of unemployment benefit entitlement for persons who have personally registered as unemployed with the employment agency and exercised their right of determination under Section 137 Paragraph 2 of the German Social Code, Book III (SGB III) to stipulate that the entitlement should only accrue at a specific point in time more than three months in the future dependent on a new registration as unemployed, because the effect of the earlier registration has expired?
BSG
Exercise of the right of determination pursuant to Section 137 Paragraph 2 SGB III – no new registration as unemployed is required
Decision:
If applicants have registered as unemployed and exercised their right of determination under Section 137 Paragraph 2 of the German Social Code, Book III (SGB III) in such a way that the entitlement is to arise only at a specific later date, the accrual of the entitlement is generally not dependent on a further registration as unemployed.
Source
www.socialgerichtsabilities.de
Note by Detlef Brock:
The basic entitlement to unemployment benefit also arises in the cases of Section 137 Paragraph 2 of the German Social Code, Book III (SGB III) only at the time specified by the applicant (see in detail BSG, judgment of 05.03.2026 – B 11 AL 6/24 R).
The fact that more than three months elapsed between the registration as unemployed and the date specified by the plaintiff does not lead to the initial ineffectiveness of the registration as unemployed, nor to its expiry (also BSG, judgment of 05.03.2026 – B 11 AL 6/24 R).
It is recognized that the Federal Employment Agency can also accept an earlier registration as unemployed. To subsequently criticize the unemployed person for the early nature of their registration would be contrary to good faith due to the principle of "venire contra factum proprium" (Federal Social Court, Judgment of May 18, 2010 – B 7 AL 49/08 R).
4. Decisions on social assistance (SGB XII)
4.1 – SG Dresden, Judgment of 23.02.2026 – S 20 SO 131/23 –
Appeal pending: LSG Saxony – L 2 SO 38/26
Topic:
Provision of an electric wheelchair with additional functions for a female student as part of integration assistance
Decision:
An electric wheelchair with upright and standing function is to be granted as an aid for participation in education pursuant to Sections 102 Paragraph 1 No. 3, 112 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 No. 2, Sentence 5 in conjunction with Section 75 Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2 Sentence 1 No. 3 SGB IX for university studies in teacher training.
Discrimination would be unacceptable in light of the requirement to promote participation (§ 90 para. 4 SGB IX).
Source
www.socialgerichtsabilities.de
Note by Detlef Brock:
For studies, a motor vehicle allowance can also be granted in the form of the reimbursement of costs for a vehicle adapted for disabled persons (SG Lüneburg, file no. S 38 SO 34/25 ER).
4.2 – SG Marburg, Judgment of 05.02.2026 – S 9 SO 96/24 –
Topic
: Considering neighborly assistance as income
Reimbursements for expenses incurred in the context of neighborhood assistance are considered income.
Principle:
A reimbursement of expenses paid from the relief amount pursuant to Section 45b of the German Social Code, Book XI (SGB XI), to a person authorized under state law to provide neighborhood assistance must be counted as income towards that person's social assistance entitlement. This reimbursement of expenses is not covered by the exception in Section 82, Paragraph 1, Sentence 2, No. 8 of the German Social Code, Book XII (SGB XII).
Source
www.socialgerichtsabilities.de
Note by Detlef Brock:
Differing opinion on citizen's income/basic income:
LSG Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Judgment of 13.05.2025 – L 8 AS 21/25 – (Appeal allowed)
The job center may not consider a monthly allowance of up to €125 for providing assistance to neighbors in need of care as income. This assistance constitutes a privileged allowance (§ 1 No. 4 of the Citizen's Allowance Ordinance in conjunction with § 3 No. 36 of the Income Tax Act).
4.3 – LSG Baden-Württemberg, decision of 01.06.2026 – L 7 SO 1227/26 ER-B –
Section
113 Paragraph 2 No. 6, Section 82 SGB IX does not provide a legal basis for the reimbursement of costs for a home sign language course for the foster parents of a deaf child.
Guiding principles
The costs of a home sign language course for the foster parents of a hearing-impaired child living in a foster family are not covered by the child's entitlement to benefits for social participation under Section 113 of the German Social Code, Book IX (SGB IX).
Source
www.socialgerichtsabilities.de
5. Decisions concerning the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG)
5.1 – Social Court Munich, decision of 06.07.2026 – S 42 AY 55/26 ER –
Subject:
Restriction of entitlement to benefits pursuant to Section 5 Paragraph 4 Sentence 2 in conjunction with Section 1a Paragraph 1 AsylbLG due to failure to take up a work opportunity – incompatibility of the provision with European law
The legal consequence regulated in Section 1a Paragraph 1 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) is contrary to EU law.
Decision:
The restriction of entitlement under Section 5 Paragraph 4 Sentence 2 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) in conjunction with Section 1a Paragraph 1 of the AsylbLG is contrary to European law. The court refers to the referral order of the Federal Social Court (BSG) of July 25, 2024 (B 8 AY 6/23 R) and to the judgment of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) of June 4, 2026 (C-621/24).
The unjustified failure to take up a work opportunity is not covered by either Article 17(3) and (4) or Article 20 of Directive (EU) 2013/33.
This means that the Federal Republic of Germany remains obliged to guarantee those affected an adequate standard of living within the meaning of Article 17(2) in conjunction with Article 2(g) of Directive (EU) 2013/33.
Since Section 1a Paragraph 1 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG) does not provide for benefits for clothing or pocket money, the provision violates Union law.
The court is of the opinion that an interpretation in conformity with EU law is not possible. Rather, the primacy of EU law directly obliges the courts to disapply Section 5 Paragraph 4 Sentence 2 in conjunction with Section 1a Paragraph 1 of the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylbLG), without the need for prior action by the legislature or the Federal Constitutional Court.
Source
www.socialgerichtsabilities.de
6. Miscellaneous
6.1 – SG Karlsruhe, Judgment of 09.06.2026 – S 12 BK 1050/26 –
The issue of
income tax refunds must be reported to the family benefits office immediately when receiving child allowance.
Decision:
The granting of child supplement must be revoked with retroactive effect if other or state income is not reported (§ 45 para. 2 sentence 3 no. 2 SGB X in conjunction with § 11 para. 4, 6 and 7 no. 1 BKGG as well as § 330 para. 2 sentence 1 SGB III).
An income tax refund must be taken into account as income reducing benefits for the child supplement (see BSG, judgment of 24.06.2020 – B 4 AS 9/20 R).
The mere fact that the income tax refund is not explicitly mentioned as an example in the authority's information sheet does not preclude the assumption of gross negligence.
The authority had no discretion in revoking the grant notice. If the conditions of Section 45 Paragraph 2 Sentence 3 of the German Social Code, Book X (SGB X) are met, the grant must be revoked retroactively in accordance with Section 11 Paragraph 7 Number 1 of the German Federal Child Benefit Act (BKGG) in conjunction with Section 330 Paragraph 2 Sentence 1 of the German Social Code, Book III (SGB III).
Source
www.socialgerichtsabilities.de
Note on citation style
Unpublished judgments or comments may only be quoted with attribution to the source:
- Source: Tacheles Case Law Ticker Week XX/2025 – Author: Detlef Brock
- Newsletter: Thomé Newsletter 12/2025 from April 6th, 2025 - Author: Harald Thomé
- License: Creative Commons CC BY-SA 3.0
Quotations without source information are not permitted.
