Core Viewpoint - The recent "social security new regulations" have raised concerns among small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) regarding compliance costs and potential legal risks associated with employee social security contributions [2][6][19]. Group 1: Impact of New Regulations - The Supreme Court's "Interpretation No. 2" allows employees to claim economic compensation if their employer fails to pay social security, even if there was a prior agreement not to do so [2][4]. - Many SMEs have historically not paid social security, and the new regulations may lead to a loss of trust between employers and employees, potentially resulting in layoffs or business closures [6][19]. - The average additional cost for a factory to comply with social security payments can significantly impact profitability, with estimates suggesting an increase of 2.1 million yuan per employee annually [8][17]. Group 2: Misinterpretation of "Universal Social Security" - Experts argue that the term "universal social security" is misleading, as the requirement for social security contributions has existed but was not strictly enforced [4][13]. - The implementation of "Interpretation No. 2" is not a signal for immediate universal social security but rather a reinforcement of existing laws that have not been adequately enforced [4][15]. - The actual compliance rates for social security contributions among SMEs remain low, with many still not participating in the system [23][24]. Group 3: Long-term Considerations - The long-term sustainability of the social security system relies on broader compliance, which is essential for providing basic living guarantees for retirees [29][31]. - There is a need for a balanced approach that considers both the financial burdens on businesses and the willingness of employees to contribute to social security [24][27]. - The gradual push towards universal social security is seen as necessary for the overall stability of the pension system, despite current challenges [30][31].

Summary of Conference Call Records Industry Overview - The records discuss the impact of new social security regulations on the flexible employment model prevalent in industries such as express delivery, food delivery, and ride-hailing services. Workers in these sectors often register as individual business owners, forming cooperative relationships with companies to avoid traditional social security obligations, but they face issues of insufficient protection [1][2][3]. Key Points and Arguments - **Social Security Payment Willingness**: The willingness to pay social security is significantly influenced by economic factors. Low-income blue-collar workers prefer immediate income over long-term social security benefits. Under the new regulations, if employees regret their previous agreement not to pay social security, courts typically support back payments [1][9]. - **Legal Interpretations**: The Supreme Court's interpretation supports back payments for social security but only on a case-by-case basis. Companies are not required to pay for all employees unless regulatory bodies enforce comprehensive recovery, which requires legislative support [1][10]. - **Tax Reporting Regulations**: New tax reporting regulations for internet platform companies have increased tax rates for flexible employment platforms, potentially pushing companies to larger professional firms to mitigate risks. The impact on food delivery riders and domestic service workers remains to be seen [1][15]. - **Cost Implications**: Compliance with social security payments can increase labor costs by 20% to 50%, with higher costs in major cities. Hiring retirees and student interns typically involves labor relations that do not require social security payments [1][17][19]. - **Employment Types**: There are three main employment types: labor relations, employment relations, and cooperative relations. Flexible employment primarily involves cooperative relations, where workers do not need to pay social security [2][4]. - **Social Security Payment Variability**: The payment of social security varies by brand. For instance, JD Express typically pays social security, while other companies may not. The proportion of food delivery riders paying social security is very low, as most prioritize immediate income [6][7]. - **Impact of New Regulations**: The new regulations may lead to increased scrutiny and potential back payments for social security by large companies in the food and internet sectors. This could impose significant financial burdens and necessitate adjustments in human resource management strategies [1][20][23]. - **Labor Resource Companies**: Human resource service companies are expected to see increased demand for their services due to policy changes. These companies provide various services, including helping individuals register as individual business owners and ensuring compliance with tax obligations [14][19]. - **Market Opportunities**: The new regulations may create opportunities for large human resource companies as businesses seek compliance and risk mitigation. The shift towards compliance could lead to more orders being consolidated with larger, capable firms [21][23]. Other Important Content - **Challenges in Implementation**: The execution of new social security regulations faces challenges due to high enforcement costs. The actual impact on sectors like food delivery and ride-hailing will depend on how strictly these regulations are enforced [24][25]. - **Social Security Payment Locations**: There are concerns about compliance with social security payment locations, as some platforms allow workers to choose their payment locations, which can be considered a violation of regulations [26]. - **Rising Labor Costs**: The overall trend of rising labor costs is expected to drive up service prices. This trend is correlated with economic growth and increasing social security payment rates [27].

Core Viewpoint - The new social security regulations effective from September 2025 will invalidate any agreements to not pay social security, impacting small businesses and individual operators who may struggle to afford these payments [3][4]. Group 1: New Regulations and Compliance - The new regulations are not entirely new, as previous laws have mandated social security contributions for standard labor contract employees since 1993 and 2011 [4]. - All forms of employment will now require social security contributions, and the consequences for non-compliance are clearly defined, including penalties and compensation responsibilities [4][6]. Group 2: Implications for Small Businesses - Small businesses and individual operators cannot legally establish agreements to voluntarily forgo social security contributions, and violations will result in a threefold penalty: back payments, fines, and compensation to employees [6]. - Companies must pay back owed amounts with a daily late fee of 0.05%, and employees can terminate contracts and receive economic compensation based on their tenure [6]. Group 3: Strategies for Compliance - Small businesses facing financial difficulties can consider flexible employment models, such as hiring part-time employees or re-employing retirees [8][10]. - Other strategies include signing labor contracts where employees independently pay their social security, outsourcing non-core tasks, and adjusting employee structures to include part-time or family-managed roles [10]. Group 4: Reasons for New Regulations - The introduction of the new social security regulations is driven by the severe issue of unpaid or underpaid social security, with only over 200 million out of approximately 700 million employed individuals contributing [14]. - There is a growing awareness of rights among employees, necessitating clearer judicial interpretations and measures regarding social security disputes [14]. - The regulations aim to phase out inefficient businesses that exploit employees, pushing industries towards quality and service improvements rather than solely competing on price [14].

接受采访的小商户经营者表示，不想冒"被员工告然后赔钱"的风险，打算9月前和三位员工谈谈。 最高法明确社保"约定豁免"无效。再过半个月，这一司法解释将正式施行，再次明确企业要为全部在岗员工足额 缴纳社保。这项本意是保障劳动者权益的规定，却意外激活了对退休人员就业市场的关注度。 近日，麦当劳、环球影城等企业招聘退休人员的消息引发社会的热议。企业向退休人员乃至"银发族"敞开大门， 是权宜之计，还是将成为未来新用工常态？ 第一财经记者在走访中发现，很多餐饮店一直都存在招聘退休人员的情况，但并不是特别普遍，大多数餐饮企业 还是首选全职的年轻员工，但也不排斥灵活用工、多元化用工作为补充的做法。一般来说，咖啡店、美发店等均 是以招聘年轻人为主，超市的收银员、理货员等对年龄的要求并不严格；企业还会在一些年轻人不愿做的岗位上 招聘退休人员，比如正常工作时间之外的半夜、通宵等特殊工时岗位等等。 从我国劳动力市场的现状来看，老年人再就业存在自身技能不足、生理与健康风险大等问题，与年轻人相比在就 业市场上竞争力是比较弱的。退休人员虽无需企业缴纳社保，但其权益保障仍存模糊地带。去年，渐进式延迟退 休政策实施之后，如何保护超过法定退休年 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the ongoing challenges and complexities surrounding social insurance (社保) for employees in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in China, particularly in light of new legal interpretations that enforce stricter compliance with social insurance contributions [3][12][44]. Group 1: Employee Experiences - Employee Li Shan, who has been working for a small company, has repeatedly requested social insurance but has faced resistance from her employer, who offered a salary increase instead of fulfilling the promise to provide social insurance [2][3]. - Many employees in small companies, like Li Shan, are unaware of their rights regarding social insurance and often prioritize immediate cash over future benefits, leading to a culture of opting out of social insurance [41][42]. - The lack of social insurance is a common issue among young workers, with many companies failing to comply with legal requirements, leaving employees vulnerable [4][11]. Group 2: Legal Context and Implications - The Supreme People's Court's new interpretation of labor dispute laws prohibits employers from evading social insurance payments, allowing employees to terminate contracts and seek compensation if their rights are violated [3][12]. - This legal change is expected to increase the number of labor disputes related to social insurance, as employees become more aware of their rights and the legal avenues available to them [12][13]. - The new regulations may lead to significant financial implications for employers, particularly SMEs, as they will need to adjust their payroll practices to comply with the law [13][20]. Group 3: Employer Challenges - Employers, especially in sectors like e-commerce and small restaurants, face significant financial pressure from the requirement to fully fund social insurance for their employees, which can double their labor costs [18][22]. - Many employers express concerns that the increased costs associated with social insurance could lead them to reduce their workforce or shift to more flexible employment arrangements, such as hiring part-time workers [22][24]. - The article notes that a significant portion of SMEs are not compliant with social insurance regulations, with only 28.4% of companies paying the full amount based on employees' average monthly wages [44][46]. Group 4: Industry Trends - The restaurant industry, particularly small establishments, is particularly vulnerable to the financial impacts of mandatory social insurance, as their profit margins are already thin [33][35]. - The article suggests that if strict enforcement of social insurance payments continues, it could lead to a restructuring of the labor market, with many small businesses unable to sustain operations under the new financial burdens [35][36]. - The trend towards flexible employment and the use of temporary workers is likely to increase as businesses seek to mitigate the financial impact of mandatory social insurance contributions [22][24].

社保"新规"砸向餐饮业，员工自愿放弃社保协议9月1日起一律无效，老板若不交社保，员工告到法院必 胜。社保"新规"来了，多重压力下的餐饮业何去何从？ ...

退休人员，居然成了招聘市场的"香饽饽"。"强制全民社保"新规的连锁反应，开始了？ 最近，北京环球影城在中国老年人才网发布了一则零售服务人员招聘信息，招聘条件要求是正式退休人员（已取得退休证），薪资待遇为30元/小时。 "麦当劳叔叔"也出手了。据第一财经报道，北京一家麦当劳招聘退休员工，给出的招聘要求为：需要拥有正式退休证，弹性工作制，每周上3天-4天班， 工资为每月1500元-2500元。 这就有点魔幻了。网友评价很犀利： 早在2022年，"北京麦当劳招聘退休人员"的话题上了热搜。在当时，麦当劳就曾解释： 麦当劳有5%的员工是退休人员 事实上，像麦当劳这样的餐饮服务业，早就掌握了灵活用工的真谛。 很多人上大学的时候，都曾经在K记、M记等地方做过兼职。退休返聘人员同样也是劳务关系员工的一部分，在法律上是完全合规的。 没想到吧，银发经济不仅仅指的是消费，它还包括了就业。 这也近年来也国家提倡的"老有所为"、鼓励老年人再就业的风向有关。在2021年出台的《关于加强新时代老龄工作的意见》中就曾经提到： "以前是35岁不好找工作，现在是退休了才能找到了。" 没想到用人单位这么快就适应了新政策，拿出终极解决方案：雇佣退休 ...

Core Points - The Supreme People's Court issued an interpretation regarding labor dispute cases, emphasizing that agreements to waive social insurance contributions are invalid, signaling a move towards mandatory social insurance compliance [1][4][5] - A significant portion of companies, particularly small and micro enterprises, are currently non-compliant with social insurance regulations, with only 28.4% fully compliant in 2024 [1][2] - The aging population and declining birth rates are increasing the pressure on social insurance systems, with a rising dependency ratio noted [1] Group 1: Legal Changes - The new regulation clarifies that agreements between employers and employees to not pay social insurance are legally ineffective, reinforcing the obligation for employers to contribute [4][5] - The interpretation does not create new obligations but reaffirms existing legal requirements that have been in place since the Labor Contract Law of 2008 [5][6] Group 2: Industry Impact - Many small businesses, particularly in sectors like e-commerce and food service, operate on thin profit margins, making compliance with mandatory social insurance financially burdensome [8][9][20] - The fast-paced nature of industries such as express delivery and food service often leads to informal employment arrangements, complicating compliance with social insurance laws [11][12][16] - Business owners express concerns that mandatory social insurance could lead to increased operational costs, potentially resulting in layoffs or reduced hiring [2][9][15] Group 3: Business Owner Perspectives - Business owners in various sectors report a lack of awareness among employees regarding social insurance, with many prioritizing immediate cash compensation over long-term benefits [7][24] - The financial strain of mandatory social insurance could force businesses to downsize or alter their operational models, particularly in low-margin industries [9][10][20] - There is a prevailing sentiment among small business owners that compliance will take time and may not be feasible in the current economic climate [9][10][26]

Core Insights - Promoting legal social insurance contributions by enterprises is a crucial aspect of the "anti-involution" policy, aimed at establishing a unified national market and returning factor prices to reasonable levels, which will help raise labor factor prices [2][5] - The short-term policies are accelerating, with new judicial interpretations coming into effect on September 1, 2025, which will invalidate any agreements that exempt employers from social insurance contributions [2][5] Quantitative Analysis - The report conducted quantitative assessments on the potential impact of promoting legal social insurance contributions on A-shares, presenting four scenarios: - **Scenario 1**: If all listed companies' average contribution base exceeds the minimum provincial base for 2024, 485 companies would need to make a back payment of 10.8 billion yuan, representing 0.02% of 2024 revenue and 0.21% of profit [10][11][13] - **Scenario 2**: If the average contribution base exceeds the average provincial base, 1,493 companies would need to back pay 25.7 billion yuan, accounting for 0.04% of revenue and 0.49% of profit [10][11][13] - **Scenario 3**: If the average contribution base exceeds the actual national average for 2023, 3,002 companies would need to back pay 88.1 billion yuan, which is 0.12% of revenue and 1.68% of profit [10][14] - **Scenario 4**: If the average contribution base exceeds the average wage of regulated enterprises in 2023, 3,671 companies would need to back pay 165.7 billion yuan, representing 0.23% of revenue and 3.16% of profit [10][14] Industry Impact - Industries with a high potential for back payments, where the measurement error is controllable, include environmental protection, textile and apparel, agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry, fishery, and social services [16][17]

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme Court's announcement on September 1st indicates a significant change in the rules regarding social security contributions, mandating that both individuals and employers must comply with social security payment requirements, rendering any agreements to avoid such payments invalid [1] Group 1 - The new ruling will affect both individuals and employers, creating challenges for both parties [1] - There is a growing concern among young people regarding the implications of this ruling on their financial responsibilities [1]