Increasing asylum seeker benefits: The government has a duty [think! payment card!]

dossier

"... The federal government is legally obliged to regularly adjust asylum seeker benefits to the rate of inflation. This is evident from the wording of the Asylum Seeker Benefits Act. Since the last increase was over three years ago, it is obvious that the need is no longer being met. Against this background, PRO ASYL criticizes the debate started by Union politicians about whether an increase should be increased at all as misguided. Populists from the Union are trying to lead a meta-debate about what level of benefit is appropriate in a European comparison and how entitlements could be reduced (…) The benchmark for the assessment is the actual need, according to the Federal Constitutional Court, coupled with the point that human dignity cannot be relativized in terms of migration policy (…) Individual social courts have already awarded the corresponding amount to asylum seekers who have now sued for the increased need and ordered benefit authorities to pay the difference...“Press release from Pro Asyl dated March 13, 2019 – see since then:

• "Everyone pays for it": After 2 years of harassment, petition and day of action against the payment card in Brandenburg and Berlin on September 25th in Potsdam and Berlin
  • Payment card in Brandenburg: Two years of harassment
    “With the payment card, refugees can hardly withdraw cash and in many places they cannot shop. An alliance in Potsdam is planning a demonstration against the card system.
    The Publk company certainly made good money from the development of the payment card. This is how an alliance of various actors such as the Potsdam Protestant Church District and “Women in Exile” sees it, which is planning a demo in Potsdam and at the Publk office in Charlottenburg on September 25th. This day marks the second anniversary of the introduction of the payment card for refugees in Brandenburg - apart from a few districts that had already made advances.
    The initiators have collected more than 2,000 signatures in an online petition, which they will hand over to the state parliament. They want to draw attention to the fact that apart from Publk, only the AfD benefits from the payment card. “Because it helps to normalize everyday racism,” says co-organizer Josephine Furian from the Evangelical Church. Thanks to the support of a Potsdam choir, “we will be audible.” (…)
    “Everyone pays for it,” is the conclusion of a study by Arbeiterwohlfahrt (AWO) on the payment card. With this, the federal legislature wanted to make it impossible for refugees to misuse social benefits in 2024, especially the transfer of money to their home country. In principle, international transfers are not possible. Money transfers within Germany, such as for the Deutschlandticket or for lawyers, must be approved in advance by the social welfare office. Asylum seekers receive little money anyway. The standard rate for single people is 455 euros per month, which is significantly lower than that for single citizens' benefit recipients, who receive 563 euros. The possibility of misuse is therefore hardly conceivable.
    “The payment card makes it more difficult for refugees to participate in social life and does not lead to the hoped-for reduction in administrative burdens for the authorities,” says the study, which was co-authored by Wiebke Bartelt from the AWO Potsdam district association. Simplifying administration was an argument for federal lawmakers to introduce the payment card at all. However, according to the AWO, on the contrary there is additional effort because offices have to approve individual transfers. And according to AWO, this also involves a higher level of care work for social workers in the accommodations.
    The city of Potsdam is the only Brandenburg municipality to have decided against the payment card as early as 2024. Refugees in the state capital continue to receive their limited social benefits in cash. Berlin introduced the payment card in August, but only for the first six months of your stay in Germany.
    In many places in Brandenburg, initiatives organize the exchange of vouchers for cash…”Article by Marina Mai from September 14th, 2026 in ND online 
  • Come with us to the day of action against the payment card on September 25th, 2026 in Potsdam and Berlin
    “10:30 Demo State Parliament Potsdam (AlterMarkt/ State Parliament) / 2:30 p.m. Announcement Publk GmbH Berlin (Knesebeckstr. 59, 10719 Berlin)
    Why a demo on September 25, 2026? On September 25, 2024, Secupay and Publ°k (based in Berlin) won the tender process. The payment card has started to be implemented. We would like to demonstrate at the two “crime scenes”: in front of the PUBLK office in Berlin and in front of the Brandenburg state parliament in Potsdam…”Information from the Alliance No to the Payment Card Berlin-Brandenburg – The signatures from the petition are to be handed over to the state parliament in Potsdam:
  • [Petition] Abolish payment cards! We demand the abolition of payment cards in Brandenburg!
    “The payment card leads to discrimination and restrictions in the everyday lives of many refugees and makes social participation more difficult. Numerous cities and municipalities have therefore already decided against introducing the payment card, including Potsdam and municipalities in North Rhine-Westphalia such as Düsseldorf, Aachen, Dortmund, Krefeld, Münster and Wiesbaden.  These communities prove that it is possible to create a humane alternative and resist the federal government's racist deterrence policy. We therefore call on the state government in Brandenburg as well as the districts and independent cities to abolish the payment card and enable refugees in Brandenburg and throughout Germany to participate and self-determine…”Petition at campact by Women in Exile & Friends among others to Brandenburg Minister René Wilke, State Secretary Dr. Johannes Wagner, member of the Brandenburg state parliament, district council member in the state of Brandenburg and the Brandenburg district administrators
  • See:Women in Exile & Friends –No to the Berlin-Brandenburg payment card –Potsdam Evangelical Church District 
• [An example shows how complicated and often humiliating life is with these cards] Payment cards for refugees: “Hopefully everything goes well this time”
  “More and more asylum seekers have to use special, severely limited-function cards to pay. We accompanied someone affected while she was shopping. Her example shows how complicated and often humiliating life is with these cards.
  Inga stands in a supermarket queue waiting to be cashed out. What is an ordinary moment for others is an adventure for them. An experience with an uncertain outcome. A challenge. Inga is under pressure in the checkout line.
  This story is actually just about a young woman who wants to buy grapes for her child. But at the same time it is also a kind of horror story because it is centrally about fear. The young woman this text is about, let's call her Inga, has many fears. And anyone in their situation would probably have these fears too.
  Inga is afraid for her safety. When she's out and about in her small town in East Germany, it happens again and again that people say mean things to her, she says. Racist insults or “go back home.” Inga lives with her child in a container camp for refugees. She is also afraid of the camp staff. Because what if they speak negatively about you in front of the immigration authorities - does that then jeopardize your asylum procedure?
  What if the card goes on strike?
  Inga lives – that is the reason for this text – with a payment card. This causes her further fears. What if she doesn't manage to get the money off the payment card - and therefore can't pay for her Germany ticket or her cell phone contract? And what if the payment card fails at the crucial moment? (…)
  And for Inga, transfers are actually an elementary part of everyday life in Germany. Paying for your Germany ticket, taking out a cell phone contract, buying things online - for things like that you have to transfer money - or be able to have it debited. Actually, this should also work with the cards, but in practice there are always problems. Transfers and debits sometimes have to be activated manually, which is a high administrative effort. This is virtually unusable for Inga. There is an app for the card and a button that says “Transfer”, but when Inga presses it, she is simply logged out. (…)
  And does the card now prevent so-called remittances back home? Inga laughs. There needs to be money left over at the end of the month. A person with a child is entitled to around 750 euros per month. Even with the greatest thrift, you won't have more than 50 euros left over, says Inga…”Contribution by Martin Schwarzbeck from August 17, 2026 at Netzpolitik – be sure to read it completely
• Berlin is the last federal state to introduce the payment card - the Refugee Council criticizes the regulation
  “Berlin is the last federal state to introduce the payment card for newly arriving asylum seekers. Cash withdrawals are no longer necessary; adults can withdraw 50 euros per month for the first six months. The Refugee Council criticizes the regulation. (…)
  The so-called “Berlin SocialCard” works like a bank card with which holders can make cashless payments. It is still possible to withdraw 50 euros in cash per month for adults, and an additional 50 euros per child. This cap applies to the first six months. The card can be used throughout Germany, wherever Visa is accepted. The SocialCard will not initially be introduced retroactively for those receiving asylum benefits who are already receiving cash benefits, it said. People with disabilities who cannot use the card barrier-free are also exempt from this. (…)
  In the spring, the Senate Social Administration cited ensuring IT security and the creation of data protection requirements as reasons for the long delay. The introduction of the card was controversial for a long time in the CDU-SPD-governed Senate. The Berlin Refugee Council has been criticizing the project for a long time. “Refugees do not need a special card,” the organization now explained. “They need access to regular accounts and the ability to manage their benefits independently.” The introduction of the card raises questions about discrimination, data protection and the costs of the system.”Agency report from August 13, 2026 in Migazin 
• [Survey on the social situation of children in the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act] Experts sound the alarm: refugee children are massively disadvantaged in Germany
  "Newborns without medical care, children without access to leisure activities, pregnant women without healthy food: For many refugee families in Germany, such restrictions are a bitter reality. This is shown by a nationwide survey by the Paritätischer Gesamtverband and the children's rights organization Save the Children among employees of advice centers, daycare centers and accommodations with refugees. The specialists are sounding the alarm: 87 percent see the children's participation as limited; 74 percent consider the health care system to be inadequate; over 70 percent say a healthy diet for children is not possible. In practice, the payment card proves to be unsuitable for everyday use and is stigmatizing (…) "Practical experience shows clearly that refugee children are systematically disadvantaged in Germany. They are here because they need protection, but instead life is made difficult for them. Germany is one of the richest countries in the world and allows even newborns to go without health care for months. That is scandalous," says Florian Westphal, Managing Director of Save the Children Germany. "It must not be the case that children are excluded from many things due to their residence status that are self-evident for their peers in Germany. It is high time that all children in Germany receive the same rights and the same protection - a start would be real basic child security." (…) Almost every second specialist reports that families with children are completely excluded from benefits, at least in individual cases. Delays in the granting of benefits similarly often put children and newborns in emergency situations, say almost 70 percent of those surveyed.73 percent see disadvantages when it comes to housing: collective accommodation is rarely designed for children. 74 percent of professionals report inadequate health care for children. (…) More than 70 percent say that a healthy diet is not possible with the AsylbLG. A third report that the food in collective accommodation is neither sufficient nor suitable for children. Children are also hit particularly hard when services are reduced or eliminated entirely: families then lack money for clothing, food, school materials or hygiene products. The demands of Save the Children and the Joint Association: – The legislature must exclude benefit cuts and exclusions for families with underage children without exception. They bring children and families into existential distress. – Authorities must always ensure the care of newborns as a priority, even if birth certificates are missing. Your employees need training for this. The care of newborns must be a priority. – The legislature must check whether the statistically determined standard rates in the AsylbLG actually enable children to have a healthy, needs-based diet. – The legislature should urgently enshrine a legal right to interpreters in SGB V and in the AsylbLG. Language barriers endanger the success of any medical or psychotherapeutic treatment. – Lawmakers must abolish payment cards for families with children. They mean stigmatization, shame and even greater poverty for children…” Press release from the Joint Association of July 14, 2026 for the complete 26-pageExpertise 
• “Patchwork” of payment cards: NRW is taking a special approach
  “…Refugees also like to shop in shops like Nezir Ugur's vegetable shop in Mettmann: here you can find fruit and vegetables at low prices and products that you know from home. But for people who are subject to the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act, shopping here is made more difficult - because the city of 40,000 people near Düsseldorf is introducing the payment card. However, you can only pay with a card at Ugur from ten euros. (…) “This is my main problem in everyday life,” says Andrij from Ukraine. “I would have to buy a lot of things in a store like that just to get one,” says the young asylum seeker, who lives in a large city in North Rhine-Westphalia and actually has a different name. In some places the rule is “cash only”. (…) The social association AWO strongly criticizes the system in an expert report. The map brings “neither a noticeable reduction in the administrative burden for the authorities nor an improvement for those affected”. Instead, it leads to “discrimination and significant problems in the everyday lives of refugees.” And it makes participation more difficult: “Contributions for schools, clubs or leisure activities,” for example, “are often not easy to pay.” (…) The states are at different levels: the system is running in Bavaria, 19 of 28 districts and independent cities in Hesse are currently using it, and Berlin is planning to introduce it this year. There are other differences too: Bremen and Rhineland-Palatinate allow higher cash payments per month, while other countries are particularly strict and restrict payments regionally (Bavaria) or block online purchases (Saxony-Anhalt). The black-green coalition is taking a special path in North Rhine-Westphalia. Cities and municipalities decide there whether to introduce the card.It only applies directly in the 55 state accommodations. When asked, the Integration Ministry in Düsseldorf wrote that 208 municipalities had decided against it and 124 had decided in favor. In some places the decision is still pending. (…) Not far from the vegetable shop described is Mettmann's Upper Town. White and blue garlands flutter in front of the slate old buildings. In one of these houses, Martin Sahler, head of the integration department at the local Caritas, sits at the desk. There are piles of documents on top, a thick tome on the Geas asylum reform, and a sticker on the screen that reads: “Human rights – no compromises”. Sahler, sober, approachable, with a Rhenish accent, has decades of experience in refugee work and says about the payment card: “Well, we don’t think anything of it.” (…) Martin Sahler from Caritas in Mettmann speaks to the mood: “Everywhere things are getting tighter, but in most cases we talk about success stories with refugees, just look at the integration in the labor market.” Even he can only shake his head at the sheer number of absurdities. For example, the federal government no longer wants to finance independent asylum procedure advice in the future. Instead, the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees should advise people. “But an authority cannot provide independent advice,” Sahler states in dismay. And then, almost in passing, he tells us what the main and finance committee in Mettmann decided the evening before: The money for refugee counseling in the town should be cut by 50 percent. “We should now turn a full position into a half.”Article by Fabian Scheuermann from June 28, 2026 in the Frankfurter Rundschau online 
• Complaint report on the payment card published in Hamburg
  “The Society for Freedom Rights, together with the Multitude association, the “No to Payment Card” initiative and with funding from the Robert Bosch Foundation, has published a complaint report about the payment card in Hamburg.Users report numerous problems in meeting their needs, which are often not apparent at first glance. It is also about feelings of exclusion and shame that are associated with using the card and have received far too little attention in the discussion so far.This is not a classic social law publication. However, the report closes an important gap in the public debate because those affected finally have their say and show what hurdles and difficulties the payment card actually brings with it in everyday life.”Thomé Newsletter 19/2026 from June 7th, 2026 for theComplaint report 
• The Federal Constitutional Court finds basic benefits for tolerated persons to be essentially constitutional – the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act still needs to be abolished
  • PRO ASYL: Asylum Seekers Benefits Act remains highly constitutionally questionable!
    “With today's decision on the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act, the Federal Constitutional Court states: The basic benefits for tolerated persons applicable in 2018 for a period of 15 months were essentially constitutional, but at times were not currently calculated. PRO ASYL emphasizes: Since 2018, the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act has been tightened several times and the duration of benefits has more than doubled to up to 36 months. The current regulation, as well as other aspects of the law, remain constitutionally more than questionable. PRO ASYL calls for the discriminatory special social benefit law to finally be abolished!…”Press release from May 21, 2026 
  • Press release on the judgment at the Federal Constitutional Court 
  • After the verdict: abolition of “asylum seeker benefits” called for
    “Federal Constitutional Court: Calculation of salaries according to the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act is actually unconstitutional, but additional payments are not necessary.
    The sums that asylum seekers in Germany receive for their living expenses are very small. The standard rate for single people, at a total of 455 euros per month, is currently 20 percent lower than that for those receiving citizens' benefit. The latter actually represents the officially calculated subsistence minimum.
    Now the Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) has made a confusing decision in the case of an Eritrean woman. The lawsuit, which the woman had filed together with supporters, related to the basic benefits paid under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act (AsylBLG) for people who no longer live in reception facilities in the period from September 1, 2018 to August 20, 2019. In their decision published on Thursday, the Karlsruhe judges actually declared these to be incompatible with the Basic Law because their adjustment had not been made in an appropriately timely manner.
    At the same time, however, they found that the amount paid was “essentially compatible with the Basic Law.” There doesn't have to be any additional payments because they were "not obviously too low." There were clear differences to comparable services. “However, it is not clear that the benefits granted could no longer ensure the physical existence of people, the opportunity to maintain interpersonal relationships and a minimum level of participation in social, cultural and political life,” says the reasons for the decision. The judges also declared the differences to be legal because those affected were “probably only temporarily” in Germany, which is why the legislature was allowed to exclude part of the socio-cultural needs. (…)
    Pro Asyl and the German Lawyers' Association (DAV) had already criticized in advance statements to the Federal Constitutional Court on the case that asylum seekers were granted significantly lower basic needs than those receiving citizens' benefit or social assistance. According to Pro Asyl, the determination of the difference was not comprehensible and transparent. The DAV complained that the legislature had “unilaterally assumed and constructed reduced needs” and had “completely ignored” objectively justified additional needs supported by empirical findings. Pro Asyl recalled that Karlsruhe had emphasized in its previous decisions "that there is only one human dignity and no different levels or expressions of human dignity depending on origin or status.".”Article by Jana Frielinghaus from May 22, 2026 in ND online 
  • See also the extensive review inThomé Newsletter 18/2026 from May 25, 2026 
• Clear results after 2 years of payment card: It subjects refugees to discriminatory special rules, technical restrictions and official control
  • Two years of payment cards: an instrument of control – not participation
    "Two years after its introduction, it is clear: the payment card for refugees does not deliver what was politically promised. It does not simplify procedures, but rather creates new problems. It does not relieve the burden on municipalities, but creates additional administrative burden. And it does not strengthen the participation of refugees, but restricts their everyday life. (...) It subjects refugees to special rules, technical restrictions and official control. Instead of enabling them to lead a self-determined life, it excludes them from everyday life.PRO ASYL had already warned of the consequences two years ago . Today it is clear that the payment card is not a contribution to less bureaucracy, but rather a political symbol at the expense of people seeking protection. It stigmatizes, controls and makes participation difficult. PRO ASYL demands: Subsistence-securing benefits must be paid out without discrimination. The payment card should be abolished.” Press statement from Pro Asyl dated May 16, 2026 , see also:
  • Payment card misses its goal: AWO criticizes new hurdles instead of social participation
    “Two years ago, on May 16, 2024, the payment card for refugees was introduced - with the aim of making services easier to manage. A current practical evaluation by the AWO Federal Association now shows: In everyday life, the payment card leads to considerable discrimination, restrictions and makes social participation more difficult…”AWO press release from May 15, 2026 – although we don’t know of any goal that justifies the payment card
  • Two years after its introduction: Mixed results of the payment card for asylum seekers
    “Card instead of cash: The payment card for asylum seekers has been available for two years. The government wanted to prevent abuse of benefits. Associations criticize the effort and speak of discrimination…”Contribution by Claudia Kornmeier, ARD Capital Studio, from May 15, 2026 at tagesschau.de – a “mixed balance sheet” is also incomprehensible. However, see:
  • Two years of payment cards for refugees: finally more solidarity again
    “The inventors of the payment card clearly missed the goal of deterring refugees. On the contrary: the unspeakable actions have only increased the willingness to help.
    Two years of payment cards for refugees, that is two years of further restrictions on the already greatly reduced participation of asylum seekers in Germany. With the introduction of the card, politicians wanted to make the lives of refugees more difficult, and they undoubtedly achieved their goal magnificently. The idea that this would also serve to deter migration can safely be relegated to the realm of fantasy. (…) What the payment card also shows: repression nurtures solidarity and resistance. For the past two years, there have been numerous initiatives nationwide to alleviate the restrictions imposed by payment cards as best as possible…”Guest commentary by Martin Sökefeld from May 20, 2026 in the taz online 
• Payment cards in Freiburg: “We were the only ones who fought until the end”
  The Baden-Württemberg regional council has instructed the city of Freiburg to introduce payment cards. The social mayor there, Ulrich von Kirchbach (SPD), tells the storyInterview by Anna Biselli from March 17, 2026 at Netzpolitik.org , why his city resisted the measure for so long and how it continues to fight:"... We spoke out against it, but then received an instruction at the end of 2025 and had to implement it. I didn't understand why Baden-Württemberg was tightening the reins so much under a green-led state government. It was also initially said that there would be pilot communities or pilot cities - but then they didn't exist. (...) We submitted an application to the state that the state legal requirements be suspended. The Freiburg municipal council had suggested that. But about our application has not yet been decided. (...) The payment cards do not lead to a reduction in bureaucracy, but on the contrary to additional administrative work: There are additional steps in issuing, in the charging, in the information of those affected, in clarifying practical problems There is a risk that people who receive benefits under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act will also have to be switched to payment cards. For me, the introduction is purely symbolic. It would be much more important whether such things can be implemented in a legally secure manner and with reasonable effort (…) The federal regulations do not require that payment cards be introduced Framework conditions to be able to implement this.At the same time, the states were given a free hand. Therefore, our only option is to work towards changing the state legal requirements - and of course we continue to work towards this. But to be honest, I don't have much hope for this, not even with the new green-black state government, which will probably have the same constellation as the previous one. However, those affected could sue if they were switched to payment cards and a court could then examine whether the requirements of the federal legislature were intended in such a way that the independent cities and districts are no longer given any discretion. There could still be court decisions.”
• Discrimination via payment card: sorted out at the checkout. Some supermarkets arbitrarily refuse vouchers and thus help from exchanges
  “To avoid paying with a payment card, asylum seekers buy vouchers in supermarkets and exchange them for cash. Individual markets want to prevent this.
  Dennis Schneider works at Edeka in Halle (Saale). “It’s terrible how racial profiling is carried out here,” he tells the taz. Schneider's actual name is different and he wants to remain anonymous so that he doesn't lose his job. The young man still wants to talk: “At the checkout I ask people who don’t look phenotypically German and want to buy the vouchers how they pay, i.e. about the payment card,” says Schneider. He has to do it this way because he has been instructed by his shift manager not to sell vouchers to people who want to pay with a payment card. So not to asylum seekers. (…)
  Those who shouldn't actually have a problem with the exchanges are the supermarket chains whose vouchers are used for this. Because every voucher sold means higher sales for you. But initiatives in several cities report similar incidents. For example in a Lidl in Nuremberg main station. When Benedikt Aumeier from the local initiative heard about it, he accompanied an asylum seeker there last summer.
  And actually, when he wanted to buy a voucher, the branch employees refused to do so, Aumeier tells taz. The reason given was that the asylum seekers would commit “fraud” with the vouchers and “only buy alcohol” anyway. The non-sale is an instruction from the branch management.
  It also depends on the employees
  The sale of vouchers to asylum seekers is also sometimes refused in an Edeka in Osnabrück. “It seems to be a mix of racial profiling and how much individual employees are behind it, because some are sold vouchers and others are not,” says a member of the Osnabrück initiative. As in Nuremberg, it was said here that buying vouchers with a payment card was illegal - which is not true. In nearby Hesepe it was said that the “management level” of the NP supermarket had decided that it was no longer allowed to sell vouchers to people with payment cards. (…)
  Even when asked, the asylum seekers were refused the vouchers. The person from the initiative is convinced that these incidents are racial profiling. “The card looks similar to any other debit card, so you can’t immediately tell that it’s an asylum seeker.” Rather, individual store employees would choose who they would sell the vouchers to. (…)
  The insinuation of doing something criminal
  Those affected have so far reported to the initiative about at least ten incidents in various supermarket branches in Berlin and Brandenburg in which they were refused the purchase of vouchers. “My impression is that it's clearly a racist dynamic that assumes people are doing something criminal when they're not.”
  The taz questioned Lidl, Rewe and Edeka (which also includes NP) about the allegations, as well as, where possible, the branch management of the stores mentioned. Everyone who answered said that there was no regulation to deny vouchers to asylum seekers with payment cards. Lidl explained that it would follow up on tips and provide additional training to employees if necessary. A spokeswoman for Edeka emphasized the company's claim to provide all customers with equal access; the chain stands for diversity and against discrimination. (…)
  Even several months later, nothing has changed at Edeka in Halle, says Dennis Schneider. He is still encouraged to ask people who look “not German” about their means of payment and, if it is a payment card, to withhold goods vouchers from them. He thinks that’s “pretty bad.” Nowadays, however, hardly any asylum seekers would try to buy vouchers there.”Article by Alice von Lenthe from February 8, 2026 in the taz online (“Discrimination via payment cards: sorted out at the checkout”)
• Hesse: Why exchange offices exchange payment cards for refugees
  "... Even around a year after its introduction, the payment card for refugees cannot yet be used in every municipality in Hesse as originally planned. That is about to change, as the Hessian Ministry of Social Affairs has announced. With the exception of the city of Hanau, the cards will then be used across the board. (...) However, this brings major disadvantages for the refugees, explains one of the employees at a Giessen exchange office. 15 volunteers have been organizing there since the beginning of the year One evening a week there are opportunities for asylum seekers to get cash. They see the payment card as a massive restriction of self-determination because the asylum seekers only have 50 euros in cash per month and are forced to shop in certain shops. Exchange offices therefore offer an exchange option: Asylum seekers can use their payment card to buy food vouchers in supermarkets, which can then be passed on to refugees in the exchange office. Around 30 to 50 “solidarity households” regularly support the Giessen exchange office. It's not illegal, but it's also not welcomed by the authorities, says one of the helpers, who calls herself Jenny but doesn't want to give her real name. She is convinced: “With the little money that people receive each month, they are not able to transfer amounts home anyway.” Rather, they generally needed the money urgently for food and other daily necessities. (…) There are also such exchange offices in other Hessian cities, for example in Offenbach.The city doesn't yet issue payment cards there, so people from the surrounding area mostly come to the appointments, which take place every two weeks, as Hinrich Garms explains. He maintains the offer together with other members of the Offenbach Solidarisch association. “You clearly want to make life difficult for people,” says Garms about the introduction of the payment card. (…) According to Garms, there are currently more citizens who come and take vouchers and leave cash for them. Therefore, the exchange office exchanges with one in Bavaria, where the situation is reversed. The procedure is legal, says Garms. “Either they get rid of the payment card or they have to live with what we offer,” he says, referring to politics. As soon as demand increases, the supply will be expanded…” Contribution by Isabell Scheuplein and Christine Schultze from January 27, 2026 in MiGAZIN 
• Asylum benefits: Without money, without accommodation, without a health card - Thuringia is putting even refugee minors under extreme pressure.
  “While the state government speaks of “incentives to leave the country”, associations warn against sheer disenfranchisement. Is the UN getting involved?
  No money, no health card, no accommodation? Dozens of refugees in Thuringia have had their benefits cut off in recent months. At the end of September, a total of 144 people were affected, 29 of them minors, as the Migration Ministry announced. At least 26 of those affected left the country in the first nine months of the year and seven of them were deported. For around a year now, it has been possible to completely cancel asylum seeker benefits for certain refugees. Incentives for staying in Germany should be eliminated, as the state government argues. Refugee associations criticize this and accuse Thuringia of being particularly strict. According to the associations, the United Nations is also said to have already gotten involved. (…) A case in the Ilm district recently caused a stir nationwide. The refugee organization Pro Asyl reported that the United Nations (UN) Social Committee had reprimanded Germany for its treatment of a refugee there. A UN spokeswoman in Geneva did not comment directly on the case. In general, such procedures are confidential until a final decision is made, she said when asked. (…) According to Pro Asyl and the Thuringian Refugee Council, the authorities and courts in the Free State are particularly restrictive in implementing the withdrawal of benefits. “Cutting benefits for refugees is being ruthlessly enforced in many places in Thuringia, and even children are affected,” says the Refugee Council. He calls on the state government to ask the districts to stop the practice..." Article by David Hutzler from November 17, 2025 in MiGAZIN (“Thuringia sets refugees at zero – including children”), see also:
  • Lower Saxony Refugee Council: Removal of benefits according to Section 1 Paragraph 4 AsylbLG: Objection, urgent application and, if necessary, file a lawsuit!
    “The Refugee Council of Lower Saxony e.V. points out cases of complete cancellation of benefits in accordance with Section 1 Paragraph 4 AsylbLG. This practice not only affects Lower Saxony, but also Thuringia.
    The benefit cuts affect people who have received an asylum decision that was rejected as “inadmissible” and whose asylum procedure is to be carried out in another EU state in accordance with the Dublin III Regulation. The cancellation of benefits refers to Section 1 Paragraph 4 AsylbLG. According to this revised passage, the AsylbLG provides for the complete cancellation of benefits if an asylum applicant has already received international protection in another EU state or, in accordance with Dublin III Regulation, another state is responsible for the asylum procedure. According to several social courts, these benefit cuts are contrary to EU law (EU Reception Directive) and unconstitutional. In the event of benefit cuts, you should therefore immediately file an objection and at the same time submit an urgent application to the responsible social court. If the objection is rejected, a lawsuit would then have to be filed with the social court…”Report to the Thuringia Refugee Council (with the incorrect date December 31, 2025)
  • At the same time see the message:A good one in seven children are at risk of poverty, four times as likely to be affected if they have an immigration background - according to Unicef, development in Germany has been stagnating for years
• Refugee rights: Federal government does not implement UN request
  "For the first time, Germany has to answer for the protection of social rights in a UN procedure. The federal government has not followed a request from the responsible body for weeks. No accommodation, no food, no health care - rejected asylum seekers who have to carry out their asylum procedure in a European country other than Germany should receive nothing from the state. The traffic light coalition had pushed through this tightening, although there were and are major legal concerns. One of the points of criticism was always: the people affected are threatened die Obdachlosigkeit. Genau das ist einem Mann aus Syrien in Thüringen passiert. Sein Asylantrag wurde abgelehnt. Zuständig sei Malta, da er über diesen Weg in die Europäische Union eingereist ist. Sozialleistungen wurden ihm vollständig gestrichen. Er musste im Februar die Unterkunft verlassen und seine Gesundheitskarte abgeben. Nach Malta ausreisen könne er nicht. Er habe keine Passdokumente. Die Behörden hätten außerdem nicht mit Malta abgesprochen, dass und wann er dort einreisen könne. So berichtet es die Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (GFF). Der Verein unterstützt den 20-year-olds in court proceedings against the exclusion of benefits have so far been unsuccessful (…) The Society for Civil Rights then brought the case to the UN Social Committee. In 2023, Germany signed the so-called Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Since then, individual complaints have been possible in this country.(…) In mid-October, the committee called on Germany to ensure that the man received at least basic care during the ongoing proceedings. That means: accommodation, healthcare and access to a subsistence level. (…) Not much has happened since then. From the man's point of view: nothing. He continues to receive no benefits and is dependent on the help of friends and supporters, says procedure coordinator Lena Frerichs from the GFF. He also urgently needs to go to the dentist. (…) The federal government seems to have already completed at least one examination: the question of the extent to which this request from the UN Social Committee is legally binding. The Foreign Office writes of a “recommendation”. Germany has discretion in implementation. “Of course” we are guided by international standards and human rights. (…) The Society for Civil Rights sees it differently. “This is not a nice recommendation, not a nice to have,” says process coordinator Frerichs. "Unlike the final decisions of the committee, these interim orders are binding. The committee has decided this on several occasions." The UN itself states in its regulations that signatory states are expected to follow interim measures. States that do not do so are violating their obligation to respect the procedure “in good faith…” Contribution by Claudia Kornmeier and Philipp Eckstein from November 13, 2025 at tagesschau.de 
• Study on payment cards: Refugees pay with their freedom
  “The Integration Media Service publishes the third study on the status of the reception and integration of those seeking protection (…) But what about the second reason, the alleged reduction in bureaucracy through the payment card? An answer to this can be found in the third study that has now been published on the status of the reception and integration of refugees, which the Integration Media Service regularly carries out together with researchers from the University of Hildesheim. Of the 167 municipalities, cities and districts surveyed about the payment card, around 40 percent said: Even after the expected teething problems, the administrative effort remains permanently increased. Around the same number of respondents noted that work had become easier. The changes in both directions were mostly classified as small. What are the different assessments? The authors of the report suspect a connection with the previous payment system: Compared to transfers to checking accounts, the payment card means additional work; Compared to personal cash withdrawal relief. Regardless of this, the new procedure has added work steps: manual approval of individual orders and certain functions, for example, or consultations. (…)
  So far, the results of the proceedings have been mixed: the Hamburg State Social Court overturned an initial success in an urgent procedure against an insufficient cash limit before the Hamburg Social Court because it saw no urgency. The situation is similar in a case in Bavaria. “A decision on the legal questions that could impact social card practice will only be made in the main proceedings,” Lincoln told “nd”. “And unfortunately they take a long time.” Meanwhile, resistance to the payment card from civil society seems to be more successful: the refugee organization Seebrücke lists almost 90 card exchange initiatives against the payment card. The principle is simple: the refugees buy a 50-euro voucher from a supermarket, for example. They can then exchange this for cash at the action alliances. (…)
  In October, initiatives and organizations from all over the country met in Berlin to discuss how resistance against the payment card can be continued. “In the future, we want to concentrate on better informing those affected about the payment card and involving them more strongly in the resistance against it,” says co-organizer Adam Bahar from the Berlin Refugee Council to the “nd” and announced new forms of protest. He emphasizes: "The payment card does not only affect refugees - there are already concrete plans to expand it to other people affected by poverty." In Hamburg, the Senate is already openly considering processing other social benefits via a payment card.”Article by Anton Benz from November 12th, 2025 in ND online 
  • Accepting refugees: Many municipalities are no longer at their limit
    “A survey of almost 900 municipalities shows: “Emergency mode” for refugee accommodation will become less common in 2025. For the vast majority, the situation remains challenging…”Post from November 12, 2025 at the Integration Media Service
• Withdrawal of benefits for refugees violates EU and constitutional law: reprimanded in over 60 court cases across Germany, now also by the UN Social Committee
  • For the first time, the UN Social Committee has reprimanded Germany for violating social human rights. But also according to German courts: withdrawal of benefits violates EU and constitutional law
    "... Courts across Germany have now stopped the exclusion of benefits in over 60 cases in urgent proceedings, including the Lower Saxony-Bremen State Social Court and the Hessian State Social Court. The decisions are often based on the assessment that the withdrawal of benefits is contrary to European law and/or even unconstitutional, as the Karlsruhe Social Court, for example, explains in detail. In addition, courts point out that authorities are obliged not to apply unconstitutional regulations. The state also does With regard to European law and the German constitution, Rhineland-Palatinate sees no legal basis for a complete withdrawal of benefits. According to many experts, even a reduction in benefits is inadmissible under EU law; the Federal Social Court has submitted a request for a preliminary ruling to the ECJ (see decision of July 25, 2024, B 8 AY 6/23 E, and the plea of the Advocate General of October 23, 2025). In the case of the young refugee in the Ilm district, both the Gotha Social Court and the Thuringian State Social Court (LSG) rejected the urgent applications against the exclusion of benefits - two surprising outliers. The LSG Thuringia sees no contradiction to EU or constitutional law, analyzed specialist lawyer Volker Gerloff in the asylum magazine 9/2025 The Federal Constitutional Court did not decide the content of the legal dispute, but referred to the primary residence procedure at the administrative court, which, however, failed.Supported by his lawyer and the Society for Freedom Rights (GFF), the person concerned finally turned to the UN Social Committee with a complaint. (…)
    The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, also known as the UN Social Pact, is one of the two major human rights agreements. It guarantees the right to housing, food, health and social security. These rights apply without discrimination – even for refugees. The Social Pact, together with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (UN Civil Pact), was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1966 and ratified by Germany in 1973. Individual complaint procedures have been possible in this country since 2023. On the occasion of the decision of the UN Social Committee, PRO ASYL and the Thuringia Refugee Council are demanding that the authorities nationwide immediately end the cuts in benefits for refugees and that the federal government legally abolishes the cuts in benefits and all cuts to the subsistence level. Everyone should be aware that as soon as human rights no longer apply to everyone, they are at risk for everyone.” Report from October 31, 2025 from Pro Asyl 
  • UN Social Committee criticizes human rights violations in Germany - PRO ASYL and the Thuringia Refugee Council demand an immediate end to the cuts in benefits for refugees
    “The Federal Republic of Germany has been asked by the UN Social Committee to rehouse and provide the necessities of life for a 20-year-old refugee in the “Dublin process” who was thrown out on the street by the authorities in the Thuringian Ilm district. This is the first time that the UN Social Committee has reprimanded Germany for violating the social human rights granted in the UN Social Pact. PRO ASYL and the Thuringia Refugee Council demand that the authorities nationwide immediately end the practice of cutting benefits and that the federal states issue appropriate instructions. The Federal Government is called upon to correct the legislation and immediately delete the underlying regulation from the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act (Section 1 Para. 4 AsylbLG). (…) Andrea Kothen, speaker at PRO ASYL, explains: "The decision of the UN committee is embarrassing for Germany. The government must now have the highest authorities explain that a civilized country does not expose anyone to hunger and homelessness. If the legislature had adhered to the German constitution, there would not have been a UN complaint at all." The 20-year-old Syrian war refugee, supported by his lawyer Dr. Scheibenhof and the Society for Freedom Rights (GFF), addressed a complaint to the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. He fled to Germany in the summer of 2024. According to the EU Dublin Regulation, the Federal Office rejected responsibility for his asylum procedure, saying Malta was responsible.In December 2024, the district office of the Ilm district informed him that he had to leave state accommodation, would no longer receive social benefits and would have to hand in his health card. Without regular access to accommodation, food, warm clothing and health insurance, he lived from then on with the help of friends and volunteers. (…)
    The complaint before the UN Social Committee was preceded by urgent proceedings before the Gotha Social Court and then before the Thuringian State Social Court. However, both Thuringian courts had not stopped the exclusion of benefits - in contrast to numerous other social courts nationwide, which had expressed concerns under Union and constitutional law, among other things. The Federal Constitutional Court that was then called upon did not decide the content of the legal dispute, but instead referred to the residence procedure at the administrative court. When this also failed, the only option was to lodge a complaint with the UN. The emergency decision of the UN Social Committee of October 17, 2025 is an interim measure. When the final decision is made in the proceedings, in addition to the question of human rights violations, there will also be possible compensation for the person affected...” Press release from October 30, 2025 from Pro Asyl 
• Network meeting (CONFERENCE) on October 18th and 19th, 2025 in Berlin: Equal social rights for everyone – resistance to the exclusionary payment card! 
  “The 2nd nationwide network meeting (conference) will take place in the House of Democracy and Human Rights in Berlin. Here is the current program for the conference. Contributions are planned on the following topics: social rights, further political attacks in the social areas, legal and political disputes with the payment card system and the payment card as well as information on the diverse protests. At the conference, the experiences of the nationwide active groups that take part in the solidarity voucher exchange will be exchanged. In addition to the question of how we can better use the network for political initiatives, the voucher exchange and the related questions will be discussed in workshops. Unemployed groups working in solidarity are also invited to the nationwide network meeting (conference). In the area of ​​citizens' money, there are currently significant attacks by black and red parties on financially weak people…”Invitation including detailed program in the campaign for the abolition of the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act
  • Basta contribution to the conference: “Equal social rights for everyone – resistance to the exclusionary payment card!”
    "Dear friends, I am from Basta!, the Berlin Unemployed Initiative. We are one of the places of mutual help and solidarity and primarily advise on citizens' money. We at Basta! base our work on the people who we are and who come to us. They are people with different statuses and different languages. A person who loses their job loses their income, their savings, possibly their apartment. According to the Federal Statistical Office, in 2024 there will be one Third of the population (32.2 percent) in households that were unable to cover unexpected expenses. Housing shortages and rapidly increasing rental costs are shaping the everyday life of more and more people. And the prices continue to rise, especially for food (...) The current debate in politics and various media on the expensive citizen's money gives the impression that the citizen's money is an undeserved gift to parasites Unemployment figures, that also happened with the introduction of Agenda 2010. The difference to the ongoing agitation when introducing Agenda 2010 is perhaps the brutal indifference and malice towards the impoverishment and poverty of migrants, the homeless and the unemployed that we experience. The enemy image of “useless” people is stronger today than ever. It is not for nothing that we and the people who seek advice from us perceive the negative atmosphere as a threat. The fight against and contempt for the poor is not just a hallmark of the current government or the AFD, it is widespread in society.(…) In order for something to change in this society and further exclusion to be prevented, it is extremely important that we also give up any complicity that leads to exclusion, with which we ourselves support exclusion. Discrimination runs along different lines. It is often people who are read as Roma, migrants, black people, single mothers, the unemployed, the homeless, social prisoners and people with cognitive and physical impairments or psychiatric illnesses who are not valued and excluded. That's why we at Basta are arguing! for an inclusive society, which means that all people are supported optimally and according to their needs for as long as possible.” Post by Basta! Berlin from October 21, 2025 
• The regional council is forcing the city of Freiburg to introduce the payment card against the will of the local council majority - demo on September 25th. 
  • Payment card for refugees: Nice here – but sucks without cash
    “Freiburg was forced by formal instructions to be the last municipality in Baden-Württemberg to introduce the payment card for refugees. Outside and within the local council, consideration is being given to how they can be circumvented or abolished…”Article by Fabian Kienert from October 8th, 2025 in the context weekly newspaper 
  • Rally and migration committee in Freiburg: The introduction of the payment card causes protests inside and outside the town hall
    “We have reported on this several times. With a formal directive, the Freiburg regional council forced the city of Freiburg, the last municipality in Baden-Württemberg, to start the process of introducing the Bezhal card for people who fall under the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act. Around 500 people could be affected. In the Migration Committee of the Freiburg City Council on September 25th. Social Mayor Kirchbach has now announced that the city of Freiburg will be on September 24th. ordered the first 200 payment cards. At the same time as the local council meeting, a rally took place in front of the town hall under the motto "No to the payment card in Freiburg and elsewhere! No to the payment card for citizens' benefit recipients! No to the payment card for refugees!" instead of. Around 120 people took part. Radio Dreyeckland accompanied the committee meeting and the protest.”Contribution from September 26, 2025 on Radio Dreyeckland and especially the speeches from the rally
  • “State forces city to introduce payment card for refugees: “The city of Freiburg could decide to file a municipal constitutional complaint against the payment card”
    “The standard citizen's benefit rate is already very low at €563 for a single person. People who fall under the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act receive significantly less money at €441 for single people. Nationwide, with a few exceptions, payment cards are now mandatory for these people. Cash is usually limited to 50 euros/month. The city of Freiburg had previously refused to introduce them. Instead of drawing attention to the racist incapacitation of those affected, people usually simply pointed out the high level of bureaucratic effort. Now, as we have reported, the Freiburg regional council has issued instructions to force the city to introduce the payment card as a result of a decree from the Baden-Würtemberg Ministry of Justice from October 2024, which envisaged its nationwide introduction. Freiburg is the last municipality in Baden-Württemberg to now start the introduction process. This is happening against the explicit will of the local council majority and the city administration. According to the regional council, the “rollout process�� necessary for the introduction of the payment card should be initiated by October 10th at the latest. At the joint meeting of the Committee for Migration and Integration and the Committee for Schools and Further Education on September 25th, information about the current state of affairs will be provided. On this day, the Stop Payment Card initiative would also like to accompany the meeting with a protest. We spoke about this with Walter Schlecht from Aktion Bleiberecht and the Payment Card Stopping Initiative.” Info and interview from September 12, 2025 on Radio Dreyeckland – see previously:
  • For people who fall under the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act: The regional council is forcing the city of Freiburg to introduce the payment card
    Info from September 3, 2025 on Radio Dreyeckland  
  • Come to the DEMO against the payment card! 09/25 from 4:00 p.m., Freiburg Town Hall Square
    Call for the Stop Payment Card Initiative 
• Helping refugees with an exchange campaign: Hamburg's Left Party leverages payment cards
  “Hamburg was the first federal state to introduce the payment card. It is also a pioneer when it comes to solidarity-based voucher exchanges – despite attacks from the right. (…) At least the cash limit should be circumvented by exchanging vouchers. The principle is simple and legal. People with a “Social Card” use them to buy vouchers in supermarket or drugstore chains and bring them to an exchange like the one in the Left office. People without a payment card buy the vouchers with cash.The exchange campaigns were initiated by the Hamburg initiative “No to payment cards”. According to a spokeswoman, around 40,000 euros in cash are now exchanged for vouchers every month. This happens in the Left office in Eimsbüttel every second Friday between 5 and 7 p.m. There are 17 such exchange locations in Hamburg, four of them in Left Party offices. Similar initiatives are organizing exchanges in more and more cities, such as “Open! Munich” or “Accounts instead of Cards Leipzig”.
  AfD, SPD and “Bild” discredit voucher exchanges
  Demand is increasing in Hamburg. Initially, only people who had applied for asylum after February 15, 2024 and were housed in accommodation received the payment card. Since mid-April 2025, it has been gradually expanded to include more people. As of mid-August, 4,980 adults and 1,772 children assigned to them only receive money under the AsylbLG via the “Social Card,” according to the social authority in response to a taz query. The solidarity voucher exchange is currently being attacked from various corners in Hamburg. (…)
  In fact, exchanging vouchers does not violate any applicable law. Payment card holders cannot be required not to purchase vouchers with it. Likewise, people cannot be banned from exchanging cash for vouchers.
  Left Hamburg calls for the abolition of payment cards
  The Bavarian CSU also knows this. It was the first party to call for legal remedies to be created against voucher exchanges and introduced a corresponding initiative to the Federal Council in January. This is also the Federal Government’s stated goal in the future. The coalition agreement states: “We want the payment card to be used throughout Germany and will stop circumventing it.” (..)
  Like the “No to payment card” initiative, the Left in Hamburg is calling for the abolition of the payment card and, as an alternative, the introduction of a basic account for asylum seekers and other people without an account, such as homeless people. Municipalities in North Rhine-Westphalia, among others, are showing that this is possible and are discussing a basic account as an alternative to payment cards…”Article by Amira Klute from August 19, 2025 in the taz online 
• Brandenburg and Berlin say NO to payment cards!
  “In April 2024 ha