Art. 31 RLCAMal Regolamento della legge di applicazione della legge federale sull’assicurazione malattie (RLCAMal)

36.2009.154 · ti (art. 31 RLCAMal)

Spouses' Appeal for 2009 Health Insurance Subsidy Denied Based on Final 2006 Income Assessment

Cited in the reasoning section (point 3) to detail the specific cases for autonomous income assessment by the Institute of Social Insurance.

36.2009.154 · ti (art. 31 lett. m RLCAMal)

Spouses' Appeal for 2009 Health Insurance Subsidy Denied Based on Final 2006 Income Assessment

Cited in the reasoning section (point 4) to confirm that the lack of a net income decrease precluded the autonomous assessment of income.

36.2009.110 · ti (Art. 31 RLCAMal)

Insured Denied Premium Reduction for Failure to Use Mandated Reference Tax Year

Cited to list the specific cases where the income must be autonomously determined by the Social Insurance Institute.

36.2009.17 · ti (Art. 31 RLCAMal)

Student Health Subsidy Denial Upheld Based on Parental Income

Cited as the regulation detailing the cases for autonomous income ascertainment by the IAS.

36.2009.2 · ti (art. 31 lett. m RLCAMal)

Insured Individual v. Mandatory Health Insurance Premium Reduction Denial

This provision was used to establish the basis for the administrative calculation of the applicant's income due to a significant decrease in net income compared to the reference tax assessment.

36.2008.162 · ti (art. 31 RLCAMal)

Insured v. Social Insurance Office: Health Insurance Premium Reduction Denial Upheld Based on Recent Disability Income

This provision, specifically letter h, justified the administrative authority's decision to autonomously calculate the insured person's determinant income based on subsequent changes in status.

36.2009.4 · ti (Art. 31 RLCAMal)

Insured Denied Health Insurance Premium Subsidy Based on Income Calculation

Cited in the reasoning section to specify the cases where the IAS must autonomously determine the determining income.

36.2009.4 · ti (art. 67 Reg. LCAMal [ora art. 31 RLCAMal])

Insured Denied Health Insurance Premium Subsidy Based on Income Calculation

Cited in the reasoning section regarding the comparison of current income data with reference taxation data in cases of significant income decrease.

36.2008.129 · ti (Art. 31 RLCAMal)

Appeal Regarding 2008 Health Insurance Premium Reduction Denial Based on Net Income Threshold

The court upheld the administrative decision to autonomously determine the appellant's income based on the criteria set out in this provision due to reported income changes.

36.2008.163 · ti (Art. 31 RLCAMal)

Health Insurance Subsidy Denial Upheld Based on Gross Asset Threshold

Cited in the reasoning to list specific cases where IAS autonomously calculates the determining income.

36.2008.130 · ti (art. 31 RLCAMal)

Social Insurance Premium Subsidy Denial Due to Exceeded Determinant Income Calculation

Cited in the reasoning section to list specific cases where the IAS autonomously determines the income.

36.2008.57 · ti (art. 31 RLCAMal)

Claimants v. Administration Regarding Health Insurance Premium Reduction Eligibility

Cited in the reasoning section as the specific provision detailing the circumstances (like significant income decrease) that justify a review of the premium reduction decision.

36.2008.57 · ti (art. 31 RLCAMal)

Claimants v. Administration Regarding Health Insurance Premium Reduction Eligibility

Cited in the reasoning section regarding the specific situations allowing the IAS to determine income autonomously, relevant to the merits of the appeal.

36.2008.57 · ti (art. 31 lett. m RLCAMal)

Claimants v. Administration Regarding Health Insurance Premium Reduction Eligibility

Cited in the reasoning section regarding the specific condition met by the appellants (significant decrease in net income) that triggered the admissibility of the review request.

36.2008.57 · ti (art. 31 lett. m RLCAMal)

Claimants v. Administration Regarding Health Insurance Premium Reduction Eligibility

Cited repeatedly in the reasoning section as the specific condition met by the appellants (significant decrease in net income) that triggered the admissibility of the review request.