ANSES Cannot Control Double Payment of Family Allowances
<p style="line-height: 20.7999992370605px;"><span style="line-height: 1.6em;">It is because these benefits are settled by two different systems and the social security agency does not cross information. A report by the General Audit Office warned of the same situation in the event that a recipient is a public employee. There are delays in delivery and verification of refunds to employers.</span></p> <div> </div>
The General Audit Office (AGN, for its acronym in Spanish) detected that the National Social Security Administration (ANSES) does not use controls that allow them to avoid double payment of family allowances and does not cross the information of their settlement systems.
There are two methods of payment of family allowances, one is called the Compensating Fund System, according ANSES it allows the employer to pay the allocations in charge of the Government to all employees and then receive a refund of payroll taxes or the System and Single Family Allowances (SUAF) mechanism by which ANSES liquidates and pays directly to workers without employer intervention.
The audit report details that the agency "does not implement controls" to avoid paying the same allowance twice in cases where one spouse works for a company that uses SUAF and the other uses the Clearing System. Meanwhile, ANSES’ management competent of the situation said that the crossing of data was scheduled.”
The AGN found in their work, released this year on 2008 data that the same risk exists when one parent works for the municipal, provincial, or national public sector agencies that "do not report any family allowances payable in affidavits."
Regarding the Clearing System, the Audit stated that up to December 2008 the reinstatement of more than 23,000 cases with a total value of $12,621,122 had not been paid. Even in June 2009, employers reached an average of 324 days without collecting the compensations.
Moreover, the AGN analyzed 21 records that should have been verified prior to pre-settlement (step data validation), and found that the verification process took an average 190 days and even one of them "took a full year," to complete this entire process. A total of 36 withdrawals were to be checked after settlement and the Audit found that "none" had been verified.
Late. Finally, it should be noted that in December 2008 there were over four thousand applications for reimbursement, already paid, but pending verification, of which "80% were for the years 1999, 2000, and 2001."