Political debate about the situation of independent workers in Luxembourg - 18 June 2026
- Clara Moraru
- Jun 27
- 13 min read
On 18th June, the Chamber of Deputies held a one-hour debate about the situation of independent workers in Luxembourg, at the initiative of MP Sam Tanson.
Below you can find the different political parties' interventions, the government's speeches, as well as the Motion introduced by the opposition parties asking for an update on the work being done by the government on the reform of the independent status, which was rejected by the coallition parties in power.
Thank you, Mr. President. In recent weeks, the situation of the self-employed has again been strongly highlighted by those affected, especially because we are once again in a time of crisis, and of course, in times of crisis, they are the first to feel the impact.
And among them are the 30,000 self-employed people we have in this country, who really are not a uniform category. We are talking about freelance artists, doctors, lawyers, architects, all the way to the manager of a craft business or another company. And it is naturally those with the narrowest shoulders, and that is the large majority, who feel the various injustices the most.
Six years after the pandemic, it is certainly legitimate to ask whether we have really all drawn the necessary lessons from that crisis.
Covid showed us something that many self-employed people had long known: that they play an important role in everyday life, take on responsibility, pay contributions, but cannot always count on the same social protection as salaried employees.
We are now also three years after the interpellation that Carole Hartmann requested here, and where a unanimous motion of this Chamber was adopted.
And two and a half years after a coalition agreement in which it is written: “The work of employees and the work of the self-employed must be treated equally. Thus, the government will reform the status of the self-employed.”
It is therefore time to take stock and look at how we can move forward together. Because I believe that there is a relatively broad consensus in this House and also on the government benches. We all want that people who stand on their own feet are not disadvantaged.
When you look at the texts that have been around for many years, you sometimes get the impression that they were drafted with the suspicion that a self-employed person could more easily abuse the system, and that therefore it would be better not to grant certain rights at all, or only in a restricted way.
It is time to bring about a change in mentality in the way the self-employed are viewed.
I know self-employment from my professional life. I was not even two years salaried in my entire career; the rest of the time I have been a self-employed journalist and lawyer.
But above all, I will never forget how many freelance people feared for their existence during the pandemic.
This was particularly true in the cultural sector. We were able to help at the time, but I still remember very well the many young artists who seriously wondered whether they still had a future in their profession because of how they experienced the crisis.
And that, for me, is the core of the problem.
We often talk in this country about entrepreneurship. We say, regardless of political color, that we need more innovation. We say we need more local businesses. We complain that shopping streets in Europe increasingly look the same everywhere. We curse when we cannot find a craftsman, when we have to wait months for an appointment with a psychologist or a general practitioner.
But all of that often starts small.
It starts with a craftswoman who becomes self-employed, with a young person with an idea, with a creative worker, with a person willing to take a risk.
The self-employed are, in many areas, the backbone of our economy. They make our cities and neighborhoods lively, they create innovation, they provide the services we all need every day.
If we want that, and I think we do, then we must also create the conditions that allow people to dare to take that step.
It would also be wrong to claim that nothing has happened since 2023. One injustice has been corrected: the anticumul between early retirement and self-employment.
A path was created to abolish it, although, it must be said, only because of a ruling by the Constitutional Court. That is a good thing, but it is only a punctual correction. A comprehensive reform of the status of the self-employed does not yet exist.
And therefore I want to address three major “construction sites” today.
The first is partial unemployment and, more generally, protection in the event of major crises. If we should have learned one lesson from Covid, it is this: If we help a salaried employee because he cannot perform his work due to a crisis, then we must also have an answer for the self-employed.
I know that technically this is not as easy to implement as it sounds. I also know that it is not always easy to measure losses or reduced activity. But that must not be an argument for doing nothing.
Therefore my question to the government: Where do things stand in this dossier? Can we expect concrete proposals in this legislative period?
I also remember that in the last legislative period, a text was already being worked on at government level. Unfortunately, I have not found any trace of it now. I would naturally be interested in what happened to that text.
The second construction site is access to unemployment benefits and to professional reclassification.
Many self-employed people feel that the welfare state is less accessible to them when something goes wrong. And indeed, their situations are more varied and complex than those of salaried employees. So it is normal that there are complexities.
But what must not be forgotten is the other side of the coin: It is precisely the self-employed who take risks every day and who therefore also need protection. It is not about compensating everything or offering full insurance coverage, but about ensuring that one does not fall through the cracks when an activity fails or when one can no longer practice one’s profession for health reasons.
Many self-employed people are not granted unemployment benefits. The numbers vary depending on the period you look at or whom you speak to, but far too often you hear from those affected that it is complicated.
And here too, I would like to hear how the government sees the next steps. Will the conditions be made easier for self-employed people to have a right to unemployment benefits? Will external reclassification also be made possible for them? And how do you see the possibility of an opt-out system instead of the current opt-in system at the employers’ mutuality?
The third construction site concerns the status of the assisting spouse (conjoint aidant).
Very often these are women who have worked for decades in the business, without whom many family businesses would not function, even if it may be a model that is disappearing. And yet their status is still not satisfactorily resolved, because they are limited in the amount they are allowed to contribute.
Here too, the idea seems to be to prevent possible abuses, at the price of making the entire status less attractive for completely transparent and legitimate beneficiaries. And there is also the injustice that if you are married, you fall under the rule; if you only live together, you do not.
The coalition agreement also foresees a reform here. What is the status, and when can we expect a text?
Additionally, in recent years a new issue has arisen: contributions. The 2023 circular from the tax administration caused great uncertainty among many small businesses. For many affected, this is not an abstract tax question, but a very concrete one: how much is left at the end of the month?
Here too, I would be interested whether the government can imagine improving the legislation so that part of the burden on the shoulders of the self-employed can be reduced, knowing that contributions come in anyway, whether from the business or the individual.
Finally, there remain a number of other topics raised by the Union des indépendants: access to certain training programs, which is definitely more complicated for the self-employed; the question of tax treatment; the possibility of benefiting from certain tax incentives; the possibilities of reorientation; and access to certain aid programs.
Those affected are not asking for privileges or complete equality with salaried employees, but for equal treatment. And that, in our view, is a legitimate demand.
Mr. President, we often talk about innovation. We often talk about entrepreneurship. We often talk about local businesses. But behind all of that are people. And if we want more people to do that, then the message must be clear: Whoever takes responsibility must not be left alone in the event of an exceptional crisis, an illness, or a failure.
I am therefore submitting a motion today, which also has the support of colleagues from the LSAP and déi Lénk, in which I go into all these points again in detail.
Thank you, Mrs. Tanson.
Thank you very much, Mr. Vice-President, dear colleagues. I would like to thank colleague Sam Tanson for this current-affairs debate, and I am very pleased that opposition parties are also taking an interest in the topic of the self-employed today. During the pandemic, we were still having a completely different discussion, so I am very glad that this debate is taking place here today.
Mr. President, dear colleagues, the self-employed play a key role in our economy. They dare to take risks, they build their own economic activity, they take responsibility and create jobs. They therefore deserve our recognition and respect.
It is true that the ongoing war in the Middle East has an impact on our economy, not only through high energy prices. Our self-employed craftsmen, merchants and small businesses feel these effects particularly strongly.
For this reason, the government, together with the social partners within the Tripartite framework, has decided on a number of measures. But we often talk mainly about the measures that affect people’s purchasing power. It is often forgotten that the cap on energy prices also has a positive effect on the self-employed by helping to cushion their energy costs.
In addition, the compromise recently reached in the Tripartite, giving minimum-wage earners 200 euros more net, is a good way to strengthen purchasing power without overburdening small and medium-sized enterprises, and therefore many self-employed people.
The government has also committed itself, within the Tripartite, to support sectors that are struggling due to the crisis with financial aid. Economic developments will continue to be closely monitored so that timely intervention is possible. I would like to ask Mr. Delles how exactly this monitoring is being carried out and what concrete measures are being taken to follow these developments.
Mr. President,
The CSV did not discover the issue of the self-employed only recently or during this crisis. Strengthening freelancers is truly anchored in our DNA. In recent years, it has been particularly important to us to counter existing inequalities.
Yes, you seem to be behaving well, right? Yes, yes, yes… Because it is often the case that the self-employed are still worse off in terms of social security than salaried employees.
In this context, I would like to point to two bills by Mr. Spautz and Mr. Mosar. One of them was dealt with last year during the pension debate. The other, Bill 7923, concerns improving access to full unemployment benefits for the self-employed. Because even today, self-employed people who get into difficulties still fall through the cracks of the system too quickly. Mrs. Tanson has already addressed this.
Therefore, the conditions for compulsory affiliation should be reduced from two years to one year. At the same time, it should be possible to continue a small activity without immediately losing the right to unemployment benefits. This is not a luxury, it is a matter of fairness and of real-world conditions.
The second bill concerned early retirement and the possibility of continuing a self-employed activity alongside it, but we already abolished that in the legislative process.
Dear colleagues, these proposals are fundamentally simple. They do not aim to introduce privileges, but equal treatment. They aim to revalue the status of the self-employed and give more security to those who take risks to create jobs and open businesses.
Therefore, the majority has committed itself to continue encouraging people to become self-employed, with measures in the areas of social security, unemployment and taxation. With these measures, the self-employed will be better protected, because it is often fear that prevents people from taking the step into self-employment and opening their own business.
The responsible ministers are working intensively on the “Indépendant package,” which will hopefully be brought into the legislative process this year. This package will eliminate a number of injustices, as foreseen in the coalition agreement and as the Prime Minister already announced in the State of the Nation address.
Dear colleagues, I am also very curious to see what the socialist colleagues will propose. This morning I read in the press that the new MP wants to take up the independence issue, and I am really curious, because I do not see how this fits together. On one hand, we want to strengthen the entrepreneurial spirit; on the other hand, there are demands for a 38-hour work week and a sixth week of leave. Someone who is self-employed does not usually look at the clock and say, “I must stop now because I’ve worked 38 hours this week.” So yes, I am very curious.
Right, right.
Because I am very curious…
Mr. Engel, you were in government in 2013.
Well, you were Minister of Labor. Yes, the broad shoulders, I remind you of what came from you during the pandemic. So, Mr. President, I will stay focused here. I wanted to ask you briefly…
Mr. President, allow me to briefly address another important reform underway, the tax reform. I am glad the Minister of Finance is entering, we are talking about your topic. Here too, the self-employed have not been forgotten, especially in situations where they run a joint family business.
As part of individual taxation, it is planned that the contract between spouses will be recognized for tax purposes. This means concretely that the salary taxed as “conjoint aidant” can be deducted in the calculation of the business profit. This strengthens the assisting spouse and the income they receive for their work.
In the past, they were often the ones who fell through all the cracks and ended up without social or financial support. Because we as the CSV leave no one behind, we are strengthening the status of the assisting spouse in this legislative period.
Dear all, the self-employed are often described as the broad shoulders of our economy, and they identify with that expression.
They are the ones who take risks, invest, innovate and create jobs. This majority recognizes what these broad shoulders carry every day. And that is exactly why we ensure that they not only bear responsibility, but also receive more fairness, more security and the necessary support.
Thank you.
Thank you very much, Mr. President.
I think that it is very important for a lot of people out there that this is being discussed here in the Chamber today, that it is being discussed openly, that it is being discussed freely, but I think the most important point that needs to be discussed here is that the work is also recognized. And that is precisely why the discussions were held, today there is talk of a firefighter who should not be fired, but that the independents should go into an independent support mode. Yes, that is exactly where we should go, and Mr. Streff, I agree with you completely, I think that it is precisely the independents who take a risk in their daily lives, who are the first to not get their salary if the boutique does not work, who are the first to make sure that everything stays together somehow, who are the first to launch themselves, who are looking to create jobs, those are the independents that we are all talking about here today.
And I think that there is a great deal of frustration and rightly so among many self-employed people, because when the fire brigade is being talked about here today, it is at a time when they needed a life raft and asked for one, and they were still being pushed under water. And that is precisely why it is important that this issue was raised at that time and that is precisely why it is also important that we look at taking the necessary measures here today. And we also have the various points in the coalition program to adapt them. Of course, and we will go over the individual points later, the Ministry of Economy has the fewest. It is not social security, it is not taxes and it is not questions of labor law, but it is the questions of how we, and Mrs. Weidert asked about it, do the monitoring on the one hand, but also support the self-employed and independence on the other hand. I think that the questions they ask to continue supporting the independent start at the beginning. Dare, it has always been said. Dare, we have also always said and in parallel we said at the Ministry of Economy, dare, if you go bankrupt because your idea is very good, but the customers were not there, you will never get an authorization again. That is exactly why we introduced the Second Chance. That is exactly why we introduced a first-time creator's aid, which means that you can receive 2,000 euros as help for six months, if you otherwise have no income and are really committed to a business, in order to give the independent once again the incentive to continue, an aid that is very well received in all sectors, be it on the one hand in crafts, be it in services, but also in other areas, all those where an establishment authorization is required, which are very important.
There have been various points discussed about creating a single identifier for administrative simplification. Yes, among the 214 measures that we have, there are also a whole bunch for the self-employed, for example, one that is in the whole simplification, the person who is in a company where there are only two employees, where one is self-employed, the one who has all the administrative responsibility; it is the self-employed person who looks after his work in a hairdressing salon to also do the administrative tasks. That we are also doing administrative simplification there.
The single identifier is a direction on which we are currently working, which is also almost ready. If we talk about the files that we specifically treated, and I have the numbers here, how many self-employed people we really helped in the Covid crisis? We introduced 3 different aid schemes, because there was nothing there. There was nothing before there. Now you can say, yes, the independent is the one who knows that when you launch yourself, you don't have a safety net. No, there is a responsibility, if you as a state want to promote independents, to provide a safety net there. And there, we didn't have any, under the last government, that's why 3 aid schemes were launched specifically for independents. The first time there were 2,500 files, the second time 4,200 files and the third time 4,700 files that came in. But this help was only punctual. And that's why there is also that point in the coalition agreement, to really be able to protect the independent at its true value. But above all, we are talking here about the recognition in society of the independent, of the risks and of the commitment that the independent takes. The different aspects are important, and I mentioned the primo creator earlier, and also the 2nd chance - when will I get a new authorization again? The regime has changed, so if I go bankrupt, under different conditions, I can get a second chance. Just a few months ago, we also made adjustments there again to simplify the second chance. So to give more people the chance, once they've failed, to be able to launch themselves again. And, of course, also the entire component of the “regimes” that we have, the aid regimes, which are always also aimed at the independent.
Behind every company are people. Behind every company are faces. And very often these are the independents.
Comments