PoliticalRepoPoliticalRepo

France · Question · Question écrite

11347

Question 11347 — medicine

openFrance· National Assembly· FR

Introduced

2 December 2025

Last action

Status

posée

Sponsors

Subjects

Discovery layer

Source updated

2 December 2025

Summary

Mr. Christophe Marion questions the Minister of Health, Families, Autonomy and Disabled People on the advisability and possibility of creating a single national status of retired doctor. This is, in fact, one of the requests expressed by doctors in a situation of dual employment and retirement who would like to practice in a flexible and simplified framework so that their volunteering is not affected by an administrative burden. unsuitable. Since the authorization of full accumulation by the social security financing law for 2009, doctors have largely taken advantage of this system since they represent 11% of active practitioners and 15% of retired doctors. They are even invited to take advantage of it by the public authorities, as medical desertification intensifies and the supply of care becomes scarcer. To combat this phenomenon, the The legislator first took structural measures by allowing a significant increase in the number of medical students thanks to the law of July 24, 2019 relating to the organization and transformation of the health system which removed the numerus clausus and the law of June 27, 2025 aimed at improving access to care through territorialization and training which renovated the numerus apertus and allowed the return of French students gone abroad. But, as these decisions do not immediately increase the number of available doctors, the legislator also worked to free up medical time by promoting the delegation of tasks and authorizing direct access to certain health professionals, in particular thanks to the law of May 19, 2023 improving access to care through trust in health professionals. It is in this spirit that he also encouraged the combination of employment and retirement of health professionals and in particular doctors. The law of December 27, 2023 relating to access to care through the territorial commitment of professionals has, for example, pushed back up to 75 years the age limit for combined employment and retirement for doctors working in public structures while the law of April 14, 2023 on corrective financing of social security for 2023 established the generation of new pension rights in the event of full employment-pension accumulation. Likewise, the law of February 28, 2025 on financing social security for 2025 established the exemption from old-age contributions for doctors with combined employment and retirement and extended the benefit of the simplified regime for liberal professions (RSPM) to these health professionals. This regime appeals to many doctors because it limits the administrative burden of the continuation or resumption of activity by allowing the payment of all social security contributions in a single payment at the rate of 13.5%. But its benefit would seem limited in time. If some professionals choose salaried employment instead, others deplore the rigidity of current practice regimes, whether administrative for liberal status or hourly for salaried status. In order to respond to this request for simplification, which seems, for many, more important and more decisive than financial incentives, he asks it if it plans to facilitate access and use of the RSPM or if it could consider creating a status of doctor in combination of employment and retirement to offer a framework perfectly adapted to the needs of these volunteer doctors.

Machine translation from French. The official text remains authoritative.

Timeline

No timeline events have been ingested for this record yet.

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

No documents linked.

Sponsors

No sponsors or actors listed by the source.

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.

Sources

PoliticalRepo is an index and interpretation layer, not the authoritative legal source.