Although no fundamental changes are expected in companies’ social security obligations from January 1, 2026, it is still worthwhile to review next year’s changes in two respects. Besides the “novelties” resulting from the modification of the minimum wage, it is important to examine the new legal relationship associated with insurance obligations applicable to long-term mandates from January 1.
Regarding Other Legal Relationships Directed at Work
The social security contribution limits related to other legal relationships directed at work, such as mandates, contracts of entrepreneurial nature, work performed under utilization contracts, and elective officeholder relationships, are regulated in Section 6 (1) of the Social Security Act (Tbj., Act CXXII of 2019). Insurance coverage applies to persons performing work under these relationships—excluding long-term mandate relationships—if their monthly earnings from such activities reach 30% of the minimum wage (322,800 HUF x 30% = 96,840 HUF) or, calculated per calendar day, a thirtieth part of that, i.e., 3,228 HUF.
Therefore, from next year on, the insurance thresholds for these legal relationships will change. Since the calculation is based on the minimum wage valid on the first day of the month, special attention must be paid to ongoing legal relationships with cross-year duration.
Example
Consider a mandate relationship lasting from November 3, 2025, to January 28, 2026 (87 days), with a fee of 300,000 HUF, paid on February 10. The income forming the contribution base is 300,000 x 90% = 270,000 HUF. The daily amount is 270,000 / 87 = 3,103 HUF.
For 2025, the daily insurance threshold is: 290,800 x 30% / 30 = 2,980 HUF,
while for 2026 it is: 322,800 x 30% / 30 = 3,228 HUF.
Accordingly, the individual is insured from November 3, 2025, to December 31, 2025, but not from January 1, 2026, to January 28, 2026, under this legal relationship.
Contribution base amounts to 3,130 x 59 = 183,077 HUF, while the social contribution tax must be paid on the total 270,000 HUF.
Long-Term Mandate
Starting January 1 next year, a new legal relationship entailing insurance obligations will be introduced.
Section 6 (1) of the Social Security Act (Tbj.) will be supplemented with a new point (l), extending insurance to individuals in long-term mandate relationships who are not considered to be engaged in supplementary activities.
The concept of long-term mandate will be defined as a mandate relationship reported by the employer as a long-term mandate relationship to the State Tax and Customs Administration.
The provisions concerning the reporting of insured persons in Annex 1 of the Act on the Rules of Taxation (Art., Act CL of 2017) will not change. However, the change will be detectable in the new legal relationship code appearing on the 26T1041 notification form.
According to the legislative justification, this new legal relationship will require that the insured person’s report is not made retroactively; the insured status is continuous from the starting day of the mandate until the employer reports its termination.
Therefore, for long-term mandate relationships, the insurance obligation does not need to be examined according to the rules set out in Section 6 (1) point f) of the Social Security Act. The insurance applies regardless of the amount of income forming the contribution base.
Moreover, Section 27 (3) of the Tbj. will be extended to refer to long-term mandates, meaning that the rules on minimum contribution payment obligations, originally applicable to employment relationships, will also apply to persons in long-term mandate relationships.
For example, if a person is reported as engaged in a long-term mandate relationship and receives a monthly mandate fee of 20,000 HUF, they become insured, and social security contributions must be paid monthly based on at least 30% of the minimum wage.
In parallel, the Act on Social Contribution Tax (Act LII of 2018) will be expanded by referring to Section 6 (1) point l) of the Social Security Act, which means that, as with employment relationships, the contribution base equals the social contribution tax base for long-term mandates.
Consequently, this legal relationship is not considered as a 36-hour workweek employment when determining the minimum contribution payment obligations for individual or corporate entrepreneurs.
If the individual in a long-term mandate relationship opts for the simplified contribution tax (EKHO), this choice can only be made for income exceeding 30% of the minimum wage, as social security contributions must be paid on income up to the minimum wage in any case.
Choosing the long-term mandate relationship relieves the employer of administrative burdens, meanwhile the insured status of the natural person continues uninterrupted, facilitating the use of health insurance cash benefits.
However, this new option raises many further practical questions.
Ask Our Expert About This Topic
Contents of Our Current Issue
Issue 2025/12
Among other topics, our December issue covers changes related to personal income tax concerning fiduciary asset management, the registration of individual entrepreneur activity, capital increase and capital accounting, as well as electronic signatures.
Long-Term Mandate
Starting January 1 next year, a new legal relationship entailing insurance obligations will be introduced.
Section 6 (1) of the Social Security Act (Tbj.) will be supplemented with a new point (l), extending insurance to individuals in long-term mandate relationships who are not considered to be engaged in supplementary activities.
The concept of long-term mandate will be defined as a mandate relationship reported by the employer as a long-term mandate relationship to the State Tax and Customs Administration.
The provisions concerning the reporting of insured persons in Annex 1 of the Act on the Rules of Taxation (Art., Act CL of 2017) will not change. However, the change will be detectable in the new legal relationship code appearing on the 26T1041 notification form.
According to the legislative justification, this new legal relationship will require that the insured person’s report is not made retroactively; the insured status is continuous from the starting day of the mandate until the employer reports its termination.
Therefore, for long-term mandate relationships, the insurance obligation does not need to be examined according to the rules set out in Section 6 (1) point f) of the Social Security Act. The insurance applies regardless of the amount of income forming the contribution base.
Moreover, Section 27 (3) of the Tbj. will be extended to refer to long-term mandates, meaning that the rules on minimum contribution payment obligations, originally applicable to employment relationships, will also apply to persons in long-term mandate relationships.
For example, if a person is reported as engaged in a long-term mandate relationship and receives a monthly mandate fee of 20,000 HUF, they become insured, and social security contributions must be paid monthly based on at least 30% of the minimum wage.
In parallel, the Act on Social Contribution Tax (Act LII of 2018) will be expanded by referring to Section 6 (1) point l) of the Social Security Act, which means that, as with employment relationships, the contribution base equals the social contribution tax base for long-term mandates.
Consequently, this legal relationship is not considered as a 36-hour workweek employment when determining the minimum contribution payment obligations for individual or corporate entrepreneurs.
If the individual in a long-term mandate relationship opts for the simplified contribution tax (EKHO), this choice can only be made for income exceeding 30% of the minimum wage, as social security contributions must be paid on income up to the minimum wage in any case.
Choosing the long-term mandate relationship relieves the employer of administrative burdens, meanwhile the insured status of the natural person continues uninterrupted, facilitating the use of health insurance cash benefits.
However, this new option raises many further practical questions.
Long-Term Mandate
Starting January 1 next year, a new legal relationship entailing insurance obligations will be introduced.
Section 6 (1) of the Social Security Act (Tbj.) will be supplemented with a new point (l), extending insurance to individuals in long-term mandate relationships who are not considered to be engaged in supplementary activities.
The concept of long-term mandate will be defined as a mandate relationship reported by the employer as a long-term mandate relationship to the State Tax and Customs Administration.
The provisions concerning the reporting of insured persons in Annex 1 of the Act on the Rules of Taxation (Art., Act CL of 2017) will not change. However, the change will be detectable in the new legal relationship code appearing on the 26T1041 notification form.
According to the legislative justification, this new legal relationship will require that the insured person’s report is not made retroactively; the insured status is continuous from the starting day of the mandate until the employer reports its termination.
Therefore, for long-term mandate relationships, the insurance obligation does not need to be examined according to the rules set out in Section 6 (1) point f) of the Social Security Act. The insurance applies regardless of the amount of income forming the contribution base.
Moreover, Section 27 (3) of the Tbj. will be extended to refer to long-term mandates, meaning that the rules on minimum contribution payment obligations, originally applicable to employment relationships, will also apply to persons in long-term mandate relationships.
For example, if a person is reported as engaged in a long-term mandate relationship and receives a monthly mandate fee of 20,000 HUF, they become insured, and social security contributions must be paid monthly based on at least 30% of the minimum wage.
In parallel, the Act on Social Contribution Tax (Act LII of 2018) will be expanded by referring to Section 6 (1) point l) of the Social Security Act, which means that, as with employment relationships, the contribution base equals the social contribution tax base for long-term mandates.
Consequently, this legal relationship is not considered as a 36-hour workweek employment when determining the minimum contribution payment obligations for individual or corporate entrepreneurs.
If the individual in a long-term mandate relationship opts for the simplified contribution tax (EKHO), this choice can only be made for income exceeding 30% of the minimum wage, as social security contributions must be paid on income up to the minimum wage in any case.
Choosing the long-term mandate relationship relieves the employer of administrative burdens, meanwhile the insured status of the natural person continues uninterrupted, facilitating the use of health insurance cash benefits.
However, this new option raises many further practical questions.