DistantNews
Support us
🇰🇷 South Korea /Economy & Trade

South Korea's welfare eligibility standard criticized for excluding recipients

From Hankyoreh · () Korean

Translated from Korean, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

News Sources not specified New plan
  • Civic groups argue South Korea's "standard median income" is set too high, shrinking the pool of eligible welfare recipients.
  • They claim the government arbitrarily lowers the income standard, creating a widening gap between the official figure and actual median income.
  • Experts and advocates are calling for legal revisions to ensure the standard is based on actual income data and to increase transparency in its calculation.

South Korean civic groups are demanding urgent reforms to the calculation of the "standard median income," arguing that the current method inflates the figure and excludes many eligible individuals from welfare programs. A forum held at the National Assembly highlighted concerns that the government is arbitrarily lowering this income benchmark, leading to a reduction in welfare recipients.

The base increase rate has not been followed in five out of the last six years. The gap has continued to widen because the lowered standard point from the understated base increase rate becomes the starting point for the next year.

— Jeong Chang-ryulProfessor of Social Welfare at Dankook University, explaining the discrepancy in median income calculations.

Experts presented data showing a growing disparity between the standard median income, used to determine eligibility for over 80 welfare benefits, and the actual median income derived from household financial surveys. Professor Jeong Chang-ryul of Dankook University explained that the standard median income is calculated using a base increase rate and an additional increase rate. However, he stated that the base increase rate has not been followed in five out of the last six years, leading to a "lowered starting point" that widens the gap each year.

For instance, the standard median income for a four-person household in 2024 was set at 6.49 million won per month, whereas applying the standard calculation principles would have resulted in 7.6 million won. This discrepancy, advocates argue, is not merely a technical issue but a structural problem rooted in budget constraints.

The cumulative understatement of the standard median income is not just a problem of calculation methods or statistical techniques, but a structural issue stemming from the inability to overcome budget constraints. Reforms to the governance of standard median income realization and expansion of welfare finances are necessary.

— Lee Ju-haSocial Welfare Committee Chair of Participatory Synergy and Professor of Public Administration at Dongguk University, discussing structural issues.

Calls for reform include mandatory, close monitoring of the Central Living Security Committee, which determines the standard median income, and legal amendments to mandate decisions based on actual measured income. Additionally, transparency in the decision-making process is being demanded, with proposals for open committee meetings and a pre-announcement system to gather public input. The Ministry of Health and Welfare has indicated it will present a new calculation method next month, aiming for clearer principles and increased transparency.

We are discussing ways to reform the standard median income calculation system within the expert task force (TF) and the livelihood and self-support benefit subcommittee of the Central Living Security Committee. We are reviewing directions to enhance transparency and predictability so that the principles are understandable to everyone and the adjustment process does not appear arbitrary.

— Park Min-jungHead of the Basic Livelihood Security Division at the Ministry of Health and Welfare, outlining plans for reform.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by Hankyoreh in Korean. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.

More Stories

From Our Blog