Relief bonus 2026: Legally compliant guidelines for HR

The relief bonus planned by the federal government for 2026 is intended to provide employees with financial support in view of the continued high cost of living and energy. A tax- and social security-free payment of up to 1,000 euros per employee is planned. Unlike classic state benefits, however, the payment is not made directly by the state, but rather via the employer. This construction shifts the practical implementation and thus also the legal issues significantly into the area of ​​labor law.

Relief bonus 2026: No entitlement, but bound to legal limits

Even if the specific legal design is still pending, it is already apparent that the relief bonus will be based on well-known models such as the inflation compensation bonus. Government spokespersons also said this at yesterday’s government press conference. According to what is currently known, there should be no general entitlement of employees to the bonus. In principle, employers should be free to decide whether to pay the premium or not.

This voluntary nature opens up scope for design, but by no means means complete legal freedom. As soon as an employer decides to pay, the specific form is subject to labor law limits. The relief bonus becomes part of the company’s remuneration structure, even if it is not to be viewed as consideration for work performed.

Relief bonus must necessarily be “on top”.

The tax privileges for the relief bonus will probably be linked to the fact that it is granted as a genuine additional benefit. The prerequisite is that the payment is made in excess of the wages that are already owed. It follows that existing remuneration components may not be replaced by or converted into the bonus.

In particular, it is not permitted to offset the premium against existing claims or to reallocate owed benefits accordingly. In practice, this means that employers cannot finance the relief bonus by simply restructuring the remuneration, but must provide an additional, independent service.

Relief bonus: principle of equal treatment under labor law

Employers who decide to pay out the relief bonus must in particular observe the principle of equal treatment under labor law. According to this, employees in comparable situations must generally be treated equally, so that the distribution of the bonus must be based on comprehensible and objectively justified criteria.

It is permissible not to grant the benefit uniformly, for example by staggering it according to income level, taking the scope of employment into account or linking it to actual work performance. A restriction to certain groups of employees can also be considered, provided there are objective reasons for this.

However, arbitrary differentiations or unrelated group formations are not permitted. In the event of violations, there is a risk of a so-called “upward adjustment”, meaning that disadvantaged employees can claim equal treatment, which can have significant financial consequences.

According to the courts, these groups of people can be excluded

A look at the case law on the inflation compensation premium makes it clear under which conditions employers can exclude individual groups of employees from the payment. At the same time, the courts provide important information on the labor law structure of the planned relief bonus.

The decisive factor is always whether the differentiation is objectively justified and respects the principle of equal treatment and prohibitions of discrimination. The LAG Baden-Württemberg has decided that an inflation compensation bonus can be designed as a special payment related to work performance. This means that employees without work during the reference period – such as employees with long-term illness – may be excluded from payment (LAG Baden-Württemberg, judgment of January 24, 2024, ref. 10 Sa 4/24).

In contrast, the BAG has made it clear that the general exclusion of employees in the release phase of partial retirement may be inadmissible, as this puts part-time employees at a disadvantage (BAG, judgment of November 12, 2024, no. 9 AZR 71/24). For employees on parental leave, however, the LAG Düsseldorf has considered an exclusion to be permissible because the employment relationship is suspended during this time (LAG Düsseldorf, judgment of August 14, 2024, ref. 14 SLa 303/24).

The Stuttgart Labor Court has decided in one case that fixed-term employees may not be excluded from the inflation compensation bonus without an objective reason (ArbG Stuttgart, judgment of November 14, 2023, Ref. 3 Ca 2713/23). Linking the payment to the continuation of the employment relationship beyond a certain date puts temporary employees at an impermissible disadvantage if the bonus relates to a reference period that has already passed.

Finally, a decision by the ArbG Essen shows that cut-off date regulations can also be permissible: Linking the bonus to an unterminated employment relationship at a certain point in time can justify a differentiation and even enable a refund (ArbG Essen, judgment of October 12, 2023, Ref. 1 Ca 1371/23). Overall, this means that differentiations are possible, but must always be implemented consistently and free of arbitrary or discriminatory criteria.

Relief bonus: co-determination of the works council

The structure of the relief bonus is part of the company wage structure and is therefore fundamentally subject to the right of co-determination in accordance with Section 87 Paragraph 1 No. 10 BetrVG. It is irrelevant that the bonus is not granted in return for work performed. If there is a works council, it must be involved in particular when determining the distribution principles, determining which groups of employees benefit and the specific payment modalities, such as staggered payments or payments made in installments. However, the basic decision as to whether a bonus is granted at all is not subject to co-determination; this remains with the employer.

In practice, it is often advisable to conclude a works agreement for legally secure implementation. If the works council is not properly involved, legal conflicts and delays can result.

Role of collective agreements

In companies bound by collective bargaining agreements, the collective bargaining parties are particularly important. The relief bonus can be the subject of collective bargaining and can be bindingly regulated in collective agreements. In this case, an enforceable claim arises for the employees.

Collective agreements offer the advantage that they create uniform regulations for entire industries or companies and thus create legal clarity. At the same time, they make it possible to embed the premium in an overall package of salary adjustments and term regulations.

However, there are practical limitations. Many collective agreements have fixed terms and are subject to peace obligations. The government will most likely limit the payment of the relief bonus to 2026 – in contrast to the inflation compensation bonus at that time, which had a significantly longer term. Without an ongoing collective bargaining round, short-term implementation may be difficult. This means that the actual distribution of the bonus is likely to depend heavily on the collective bargaining agreement.

Notes for practice

The relief bonus is usually paid out via payroll. The service should be clearly shown as a tax-free additional service.

A structured approach is recommended for legally secure implementation:
First, the economic conditions should be examined. Clear criteria for distribution must then be established. If there is a works council, it must be involved at an early stage.

The following key points of action arise for employers with regard to the planned relief bonus:

• Note the voluntary nature:
  There is no obligation to pay. However, decisions should be made strategically in the context of employee retention and competitiveness.
• Check general tariff conditions:
  Existing or upcoming collective bargaining can provide a suitable framework for uniform and legally secure implementation.
• Involve the works council at an early stage:
  For questions requiring co-determination, timely coordination is essential.
• Ensure additionality:
  The bonus may not replace existing salary components.
• Ensuring equal treatment:
  Differentiations must be factually justified and documented.
• Consider economic performance:
  Smaller companies in particular should carefully examine their financial viability.
• Keep an eye on the time window:
  Due to the time limit currently being discussed, an early decision is necessary.