Today I went to the relevant department to consult a topic that many only children are concerned about.
And this topic is the 80s and 90s, responding to the call of ** to have only one good couple. Today, I went to the community and the social security bureau to consult carefully, and the result was; Parents (60 years old for men, 55 years old for women) or early retirement, sick retirement, retirement age, social security, regardless of divorce, and any party who has not given birth to children after remarriage, as long as they have an only child certificate, can enjoy a monthly payment or a one-time payment of only child allowance per person in accordance with local policies.
The crux of the matter is that after either party reaches retirement age and has not paid social security, it is not possible to receive the individual only child allowance. Like what; If a man has reached the age of 60 (both male and female) has reached the retirement age according to the regulations, but has not purchased and paid social security, and has not retired, a person will not receive the only child fee.
Today, there are many divorced parents who have not remarried, and they all come to consult about this matter, and many of them have not paid social security, and have neither pension nor only child payment. Some parents who have paid social security and retired normally can get the only child fee.
Those who can't afford social security can only look forward to it, can't parents who don't have social security enjoy the treatment of only children? It's so unfair. Whether it is urban or rural, the parents of only children still responded to the call of ** in the 80s, and they can't enjoy the only child fee when they reach the age of 60? Counting on ** to provide for the elderly has become an empty word.
I don't know how rural parents receive the one-child allowance.