Assets wrongly counted: when the Jobcenter may not touch your savings

The Jobcenter rejects your Bürgergeld application for "too high assets" or demands that you cash in your Riester pension? In very many cases this is wrong. The grace period (Karenzzeit) in the first year protects up to 40,000 €, certain old-age provision is permanently protected, and household contents, car and owner-occupied property are also off-limits. This guide shows where the limits really run — and how to challenge a wrong asset offsetting.

The essentials in 30 seconds

• During the grace period (Karenzzeit) (the first 12 months of Bürgergeld receipt) protected assets (Vermögen) of 40,000 € apply for the first person and 15,000 € for each additional person of the household community (§ 12 Abs. 4 SGB II).
• After the grace period, the basic allowance drops to 15,000 € per person, plus an old-age provision allowance under § 12 Abs. 2 Nr. 3 SGB II.
• Permanently protected: state-subsidised Riester and Rürup contracts, a reasonable motor vehicle (rule of thumb up to approx. 7,500 €), owner-occupied property of reasonable size and household contents (Hausrat).
• Typical mistakes: life insurance counted without checking the surrender value, supplementary care insurance counted as "assets", inheritance in the inflow month counted as assets instead of as income.
• Objection deadline: one month from receipt of the decision.

We review your decision within 5 minutes. Free and non-binding.

Why does this happen?

The Bürgergeld law thoroughly simplified asset assessment in 2023 — but in practice many Jobcenters have not yet implemented the new rules cleanly. The result: applications are rejected with reference to "too high assets", even though the protected assets should not have been counted at all.

The central provision is § 12 SGB II. It distinguishes between realisable assets, which are in principle counted, and protected assets, which are off-limits. And it knows the grace period (Karenzzeit): anyone applying for Bürgergeld for the first time, or after a longer break, has particularly high allowances in the first year. The aim is to prevent people from immediately losing their savings just because they need help temporarily.

Example: Herr S., 58 years old, applies for Bürgergeld after losing his contracts. He lives alone, has a 45,000 € Riester contract, a 6-year-old car (value approx. 5,200 €) and 12,000 € on a call-money account. The Jobcenter rejects: "assets above the protected amount". This is wrong. The Riester is fully protected under § 12 Abs. 2 Nr. 2 SGB II, the car is below the rule-of-thumb value, and the 12,000 € are well below the grace-period allowance of 40,000 €. Herr S. has no realisable assets above the limit at all.

Why do such mistakes happen? Case workers often fall back on old Hartz IV rules (formerly 150 € per year of life). And there is often no clean separation between income (inflows during the receipt period) and assets (the stock at the time of application).

Your rights in concrete terms

1. Grace-period protected assets (§ 12 Abs. 4 SGB II). In the first 12 months of Bürgergeld receipt, 40,000 € for the first person of the household community are protected, plus 15,000 € for each additional person. Example: a couple with two children = 40,000 € + 3 × 15,000 € = 85,000 € protected assets.

2. Regular basic allowance after the grace period (§ 12 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 SGB II). From the 13th month onwards, 15,000 € per person of the household community apply, regardless of age.

3. Old-age provision allowance (§ 12 Abs. 2 Nr. 3 SGB II). In addition to the basic allowance, further old-age provision reserves are protected, provided that early realisation would constitute particular hardship.

4. Protected old-age provision products (§ 12 Abs. 2 Nr. 2 SGB II). Riester contracts and Rürup contracts (Basisrente) are — provided they are state-subsidised — fully protected, regardless of value. Life insurance contracts secured by a contractual realisation exclusion (Verwertungsausschluss) can also be protected.

5. Reasonable motor vehicle (§ 12 Abs. 1 Nr. 2 SGB II). A reasonable car per employable person in the household community is protected. As a rule of thumb, a market value of up to approx. 7,500 € applies in practice; a vehicle above that may still be reasonable depending on the individual case.

6. Owner-occupied house / flat (§ 12 Abs. 1 Nr. 5 SGB II). Owner-occupied property of reasonable size is protected. As guidance: for flats approx. 130 m² for families, for houses approx. 140 m². The size depends on the household.

7. Household contents. Furniture, household appliances, clothing, books — everything that belongs to a normal household — is fully protected.

8. Right of objection (§ 84 SGG). Against any rejection or amending decision you can file an objection (Widerspruch) free of charge within one month.

9. Access to your file (§ 25 SGB X). You may at any time see how the Jobcenter has concretely valued your assets — and challenge that valuation.

Current case law

The Federal Social Court (BSG) has confirmed the protective effect of certain asset positions in settled case law. Particularly clear is the line on life insurance with a realisation exclusion (Verwertungsausschluss): if it is contractually fixed that the insurance will only be paid out at retirement age, it counts as protected old-age provision assets. [URTEIL-REFERENZ]

There is also a settled line on the reasonable size of an owner-occupied property: it is not the square metres alone that count, but an overall view of household size, regional market situation and realisability. BSG decisions have repeatedly emphasised that even larger properties can remain protected if a partition is not reasonable. [URTEIL-REFERENZ]

For the market value of a motor vehicle the rule is: what counts is the actual resale value (current value), not the new price. A vehicle used to commute to work or to take care of the family weighs particularly heavily in the reasonableness test. [URTEIL-REFERENZ]

In practice, the social courts follow these lines consistently. Anyone who cleanly documents why their assets are protected has very good chances on objection.

How to proceed now

1. Make an asset list. List every item: current account, savings book, cash, life insurance (surrender value), Riester, Rürup, car, property. In each case with the current value as of the application date.

2. Mark protected assets. Cross out everything that falls under § 12 Abs. 1 or Abs. 2 SGB II: Riester, Rürup, reasonable car, household contents, owner-occupied property, life insurance with a realisation exclusion.

3. Check the allowance. During the grace period: 40,000 € + 15,000 € per additional person. After that: 15,000 € per person plus old-age provision allowance.

4. Compare the decision with your calculation. Which asset values does the Jobcenter specifically name? Is the valuation correct? Has protected property been wrongly classified as realisable?

5. File an objection — in writing, in time. Within one month of receipt. Informal letter: "I hereby object to the decision of [date]. Reasons to follow." This preserves the deadline.

6. Submit reasons later with evidence. Riester policy, allowance certificate, vehicle registration plus Schwacke or DAT extract, land register extract. Refer to § 12 Abs. 1, 2 or 4 SGB II.

7. In urgent cases: interim legal protection. If the rent is at risk, an emergency application to the social court under § 86b SGG is possible — free of charge and, in urgent cases, fast.

Avoid typical mistakes

• Mistake 1: Surrender value vs. current value. For life insurance, what counts is the surrender value as of the cut-off date — i.e. what you would get today. Jobcenters occasionally use the maturity benefit or the contributions paid in. This is wrong and inflates your "assets".

• Mistake 2: Supplementary care insurance treated as assets. Pure risk insurances (care, accident, occupational disability) have no surrender value — they are not assets. If the Jobcenter nevertheless calculates with them, this is a clear ground for objection.

• Mistake 3: Life insurance without realisation exclusion cancelled prematurely. Anyone who hastily cancels their life insurance often loses the old-age provision protection — and on top of that pays cancellation fees. First have it reviewed, then act. A realisation exclusion can also be added contractually after the fact.

• Mistake 4: Cash flatly mis-valued. Cash at home is assets like account balances — it counts towards the allowance, not on top of it. Some Jobcenters insist on proof of origin and count "unexplained" cash twice. In this blanket form that is not tenable.

• Mistake 5: Inheritance in the inflow month treated as assets. An inheritance that flows in during Bürgergeld receipt is income in the month of inflow (§ 11 SGB II). Only from the following month does it become assets and fall under the allowance test. Jobcenters regularly offset too early here and cut retroactively — a classic case for objection.

Frequently asked questions

I have 30,000 € on the savings book and am in the first month of Bürgergeld receipt. Am I entitled to benefits at all?

Yes. During the grace period a protected asset of 40,000 € applies to you (single person). Your 30,000 € are well below that. You do not have to liquidate the savings book or "use it up" before you receive Bürgergeld. If the Jobcenter sees it differently, file an objection with reference to § 12 Abs. 4 SGB II.

My Riester contract has a current value of 45,000 €. Do I have to declare it and cash it in?

Declare yes, cash in no. State-subsidised Riester contracts are fully protected, irrespective of the amount, under § 12 Abs. 2 Nr. 2 SGB II, as long as the state subsidy (allowances, tax bonus) is running. The Jobcenter may not count the 45,000 € as realisable assets. Submit a current valuation from the insurer and proof of the allowance subsidy.

My car is worth 9,500 € — is it then no longer protected?

Not automatically. The rule-of-thumb value of approx. 7,500 € is not a rigid limit but a guideline. What is decisive is whether the car is reasonable for your way of life: occupational use, care of relatives in need of nursing, poor public transport, medical necessity — all this can justify a higher value. Argue the individual case and submit evidence (driving distances, employer's certificate, medical certificates).

My partner has saved 20,000 €, I myself have nothing. How is that calculated?

In the household community the assets of both partners are tested together. During the grace period, as a couple you have an allowance of 40,000 € + 15,000 € = 55,000 €. The 20,000 € of your partner are well below that. After the grace period, 15,000 € per person apply — together 30,000 €, so there is still leeway.

I have received an inheritance of 25,000 € while already on Bürgergeld. What applies?

In the month of inflow the inheritance is income (§ 11 SGB II). That means: if you receive the money in April, it is offset against the April need — usually no Bürgergeld will be paid for April as a result. From May it becomes assets. Now the allowance applies: during the grace period, 25,000 € would be below the 40,000 € protected assets and therefore protected. Outside the grace period it would be above 15,000 € — then the excess would have to be realised before benefits flow again.

Can I still file an objection if the month has passed?

In principle, no. But: for serious calculation errors there is the application for review under § 44 SGB X. It is possible up to one year retroactively — and in the case of decisions that obviously violate § 12 SGB II, can bring real money back. It does not fully replace the objection (e.g. for design questions), but in many asset cases it is a realistic second chance.

Now have your decision reviewed

If the Jobcenter has rejected your application for "too high assets" or has touched your old-age provision, every day counts — the one-month objection deadline runs from receipt of the decision. You do not have to fight your way through § 12 SGB II yourself.

We review your decision within 5 minutes. Free and non-binding.

Just upload the decision. We will tell you whether your assets have been correctly valued — or whether an objection is worthwhile.