Class S PRSI from ARF for JSB

[Dr Strangelove]

ARFs are definitely classed as self employment.
Why, is anybody's guess.

My understanding is as follows. From 1 January 2014 “unearned income” began to be subject to PRSI. This was the tail end of the fiscal austerity era.

DSP in their wisdom did not invent a new PRSI class but decided that it would be recorded as Class S which had traditionally been for self-employment income. As a result things like dividend income, rental profits and ARF drawdowns are treated the same as the earnings of a self-employed plumber. And consequently the same benefits (or lack of) flow from this.

I think a simpler system would be to move back to the pre-2014 system. It would get rid of daft situations that apply in the above example. It would also stop wealthy working-age people living off investment income from accruing a state pension that they don’t need.

 

[S class]

You could actually receive jobseekers if you didn’t have an ARF or had not started drawing down from one yet.

He wouldn't have received any Jobseekers benefit without an ARF.

He is locked out both JB and PRJB because of unfair rule changes and pure bad luck with the timing of the ceasing of his employment.

See here

Full time workers who become unemployed will be discriminated against by Pay Related Jobseekers Benefit

Article in Sunday Times 24 August 2025. https://www.thetimes.com/article/e6267f12-0a8b-45d3-9f4d-a4199560bd44?shareToken=35ec05119682af0a58d3d24bfbf7449f No reason has been given in the article. However Jobseekers Benefit rules now state that since 31/03/2025 it no longer applies to full...

www.askaboutmoney.com

 

[Gramps]

Thank you S Class and Dr strangelove. Appreciate your time and advice. It would seem per Irish Times article and the stupid lazy rules adapted by DSP in 2014 that there is a concerted campaign by the govt here to blatantly discriminate against people who have worked all their lives, paid into the social insurance system with no choice, but who now find the same system turning its back on them. The Financial Crisis of 2008 onwards meant that the so called job for life in banking and insurance was no more. Very few people over the age of 50 remain working in such companies despite having worked there all their working lives. The financial crisis was not caused by such workers. The reality is that companies do not hire over 55s. The govt knows this but has still changed the rules to target this cohort and the fact that 6000+ people have been rejected for JSB per Irish Times article since the changes proves this was a deliberate and very targetted plan brought in under the guise of it being pay related. That also is simply not true because it is capped at a max of €450 for 13 weeks and reducing to 55% and 50% for each subsequent 13 week period. Not much pay related consolation to anyone who loses their full time job if they earn more than €750 a week plus they no longer get qualified adult dependent payment under new scheme. JSBPR is therefore a Trojan Horse used to simply spin a less beneficial benefit than what was there previously and to effectively abolish JSB for full time workers at the same time with minimum opposition as far as I can see.

 

[Marsupial]

It would also stop wealthy working-age people living off investment income from accruing a state pension that they don’t need.

My (unneeded) State Pension is helping my working children to pay the rent on the accommodation that they need in order to hold down their jobs in Dublin, as they have no chance whatsoever of owning a house for the forseeable future. I'm sure that I'm not the only one.

On the main topic, if the DSP's new scheme is so bad then how come it was awarded to 72% of applicants and is "expected to cost the exchequer more than standard jobseeker benefits"?

Also, what is the logic behind the statement in The Times report that "these costs are likely to decrease as recipients transition off the higher payment rates."? Surely new applicants will be replacing them as they move off the higher rates?

 

[S class]

On the main topic, if the DSP's new scheme is so bad then how come it was awarded to 72% of applicants and is "expected to cost the exchequer more than standard jobseeker benefits"?

As usual, there are winners and losers in the new system.
Workers who take up full time employment for periods of less than 26 weeks, are likely losers.

People who have not paid Prsi for a period of a couple of years and then take up part time or full time employment are possible winners.

I recently advised a person, who was out of the Prsi system for more than 2 years and needed extra Contributions for their COAP, to take up minimum employment for 26 weeks to get back into the Prsi system in order to claim Jobseekers credits.

At the end of the 26 weeks part time employment they applied to sign on for Jobseekers credits, but too their great surprise they were also awarded 39 weeks of PRJB @ €125 per week.

The anomaly that allows part time workers to claim from either system will mean that none of these worker will be losers.

Some full time workers will be losers.

 

[Gramps]

Just to update.

My Appeal was rejected on both counts

(1) I am deemed to be self employed due to having sacrificed salary along the way to fund for my retirement into Group Pension schemes I was a member of and then having the temerity of transferring the small TVs into an ARF due to ridiculous annuity rates.

(2) My temporary Clerical Officer 13 Week contract does not according to DSP count as a temporary (despite the name) or seasonal or short time.

I feel very let down by a system I have paid into without choice for over 40 years. Ironically people who have never paid into the PRSI system are treated with boundless generosity by DSP.

I don't understand how I can be "deemed" to be something I have never been and never will be.

Thanks for all your help.

 

[ClubMan]

Usually I don't like suggesting it, and it shouldn't be necessary, but, in practice, sometimes it is ... but, any point in contacting local elected representatives to see if they can do anything for you?

 

[S class]

@Gramps

Do you know anyone who could offer you minimum employment of 38 euro per week for 26 weeks ?

If you could manage this you could qualify for PRJB based on your earnings over a 12 month period prior to the claim date.

Your ARF (self employment) would be classed as subsidiary employment and would not prevent you from receiving PRJB.

You would receive a minimum of 125 euro per week or more depending on your previous 12 months earnings.

 

[Gettinolder]

Hello again! As the OP here, I thought I should post an update on my own circumstances, and in doing so, I acknowledge how lucky I think I am,....but I think I still need a little advice too!

To summarise, the DSP disallowed my application for a second period of JBSE, as my ARF PRSI contributions (which is all I had on my PRSI record at the time) didnt count (is an ARF self employment or not....(still not clear!) but if it is, it hasn't ceased, and if it isn't, the Class S from it doesn't count for JSBSE). It is very confusing, but the DSP decides! I think it is when it suits, and it isn't when it doesn't. Anyway, that door is shut.

However... recently I got a VERY FORTUNATE reminder that I still had to file my tax return for 2024, and (like a gift from above!) I remembered lots of little jobs I did for former clients during 2024, which, when added up, totalled just over €5k (absolutely legit -I had completely forgotten about what happened in 2024). So I filed my return and paid the tax, USC and PRSI on that last week, and I'm now extremely fortunate to have 104 weeks of paid Class S for 2024, half from my ARF and half from paid self employment.

Based on that, I think I should be ok now for BP65 when I reach 65 next year (which I think my ARF PRSI wouldn't have covered) but I should also now be able to claim JBSE legitimately for a second period, but I think I have to be very careful about how I go about it.

I earned just enough in 2024 to be credited with 52 weeks of paid Class S, but it was very intermittent and sporadic work and only averages at about €100 per week. Although , I think I'm reasonably free to say when it finished (no further moneys received, but the phone might ting tomorrow!), but as I did apply for JSBSE in January this year, I will declare that emoyment as permanently ended on 31 December 2024.

I understand that 31 March 2025 is an important date regarding Pay Related JSB, but am I right in thinking that I won't be affected by this and would be entitled to "the old rate"? I would not be claiming for any dependants.

Many thanks in advance, everyone has been really helpful, and it's also opened up a debate on the anomalies in this system.

 

[S class]

To summarise, the DSP disallowed my application for a second period of JBSE, as my ARF PRSI contributions (which is all I had on my PRSI record at the time) didnt count (is an ARF self employment or not....(still not clear!) but if it is, it hasn't ceased, and if it isn't, the Class S from it doesn't count for JSBSE). It is very confusing, but the DSP decides! I think it is when it suits, and it isn't when it doesn't. Anyway, that door is shut.

Basically, in a not very clearly explained way, this is saying that you need to have ceased another self employment to requalify for JBSE.

The 52 class S from your ARF cannot be allowed to grant you JBSE because you have not suffered a loss of employment.

In order to qualify for any type of Jobseekers benefit, the person must have suffered a loss of employment.

An ARF is definitely classed as a self employment, and the ceasing of an ARF can allow a person with the required Prsi contributions to qualify for JBSE.

I understand that 31 March 2025 is an important date regarding Pay Related JSB, but am I right in thinking that I won't be affected by this and would be entitled to "the old rate"? I would not be claiming for any dependants.

Jobseekers benefit (the old rate) now only applies to part time workers. If your very limited earned self employment is considered as part time work, you should be able to qualify for 'the old rate' or the new PRJB rate.

Based on that, I think I should be ok now for BP65 when I reach 65 next year (which I think my ARF PRSI wouldn't have covered) but I should also now be able to claim JBSE legitimately for a second period, but I think I have to be very careful about how I go about it.

If you fully cease your earned self employment and notify DSP that you have suffered a loss of employment, you should qualify for a new JBSE award. If you time this so you are a JBSE claimer on your 65th birthday, this will extend to your 66th birthday.

 

[Gettinolder]

Thank you S Class. Much obliged