Immigration Law: The Legal Consequences of the Declaration of Commitment Regarding the Reimbursement of Social Benefits

1. starting point: What is a declaration of commitment?

Anyone who invites someone from abroad to Germany - whether for a visit, to study, for family reunification or as part of humanitarian programmes - will very quickly come across the „declaration of commitment“ in accordance with Section 68 of the Residence Act (AufenthG).

With this declaration, a person (the guarantor) promises the foreigners authority or a German diplomatic mission abroad that they will pay for the foreigner's living expenses. This promise is not just a mere promise: it leads to far-reaching, enforceable liability towards the job centre, social welfare office or other authorities.

Since 2016, the legislator has limited the duration of liability and at the same time clarified that recognised refugees and other humanitarian residence permits also do not automatically waive liability. Case law - particularly from the Federal Administrative Court and the Higher Administrative Courts - has further developed these basic principles.

2 Legal basis (as at November 2025)

2.1 Section 68 AufenthG - Liability for living expenses

Today, Section 68 (1) AufenthG regulates this:

• Anyone who submits a declaration of commitment,

• has for a period of five years

• all public funds to be reimbursed,

  • which are used for the subsistence of the invited person,

  • including the cost of housing and care in the event of illness and the need for long-term care,

• even if these services on a legal claim of the foreigner (e.g. AsylbLG, citizen's allowance).

• Not expenses are to be reimbursed that are based Contribution (e.g. regular health insurance contributions).

The point of reference is also important: the five-year period begins with the entry made possible by the declaration of commitment (not with the signature or the granting of the visa).

Particularly relevant in practice:
The declaration of commitment does not expire before the end of these five years, if the invited person

• a residence permit from international law, humanitarian or political reasons (Section 5, Chapter 2 AufenthG, e.g. § 23, § 25 AufenthG) or

• is recognised as a refugee or person entitled to subsidiary protection in accordance with § 3 or § 4 AsylG.

This is the key standard for humanitarian admission programmes and asylum cases in particular.

2.2 Section 68a Residence Act - Transitional provision for existing obligations

For declarations of commitment that before 6 August 2016 Section 68a of the Residence Act contains a special provision:

• The new system of limited liability also applies,

• However, the liability period is only three years,

• calculated from the date of entry made possible by the declaration of commitment.

• If this three-year period had already expired by 6 August 2016, the obligation ended on 31 August 2016 at the latest.

This means that the legislator has subsequently capped the previously practically unlimited liability in old cases.

3. scope of liability: What costs are covered?

The liability under Section 68 AufenthG is deliberately broad:

• Benefits under the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act (AsylbLG)

• Citizen's allowance / benefits according to SGB II

• Assistance with living expenses / basic security according to SGB XII

• Accommodation costs (e.g. accommodation in shared accommodation, rent, heating)

• Health and care costs, insofar as these are not contribution-financed benefits

• if necessary further public funds to secure subsistence (e.g. certain municipal assistance)

Back in 2014, the Federal Administrative Court clarified that also AsylbLG benefits are covered by the reimbursement obligation if the foreigner receives benefits during an asylum procedure.

However, this does not typically include

• regular Contributions to statutory health insurance, pension or unemployment insurance,

• purely internal administrative costs (personnel expenses of the authority), insofar as these are not expressly based on the declaration of commitment.

4. duration of liability

4.1 Start of the five-year period

The five years begin with the entry, which was only made possible by the formal obligation. If the declaration of commitment applies to a national visa or a Schengen visa, the first entry with this visa authoritative.

4.2 End of liability

Liability ends at the latest on expiry of the Five-year period. Before this, an end to liability can be considered in particular if

• in the concrete form a shorter duration is clearly agreed (e.g. „for 90 days“), or

• the declaration is recognisable by its content only specific stay (e.g. a one-off visit) and this stay has ended.

Important: For declarations of commitment that are submitted in the standardised federal form used today, the pre-printed text often reads:

„from the date of expected entry ... until the end of the stay of the above-mentioned foreigner or until the issue of a residence title for another purpose of stay“.

However, case law interprets this formulation not schematic, but according to the circumstances of the individual case (see below, current decisions).

4.3 Old cases: Declarations of commitment before 6 August 2016

For older declarations of commitment, in particular from the state admission programmes for Syrian civil war refugees, there was originally no statutory maximum period.

The legislator has subsequently clarified this with Section 68a AufenthG:

• Liability maximum three years,

• regardless of whether the foreigner was later recognised as a refugee or received a humanitarian residence permit.

This statutory cap also applies if the claim is made years later.

4.4 Re-entry and multiple stays:

VGH Munich, decision of 19 November 2024 - 10 B 23.483

An important recent decision concerns the question of whether a declaration of commitment also covers subsequent stays by the same person if they have left the country in the meantime.

Facts in brief

• The plaintiff submitted a declaration of commitment for his sister in 2018.

• Form: Standard text „from the date of expected entry ... until the end of the stay ... or until the issue of a residence title for another purpose of stay“.

• The sister received a Schengen visa with multiple entry and initially travelled in and out for a visit.

• About nine months later, she re-entered the country and applied for asylum; she received asylum seeker benefits.

• The job centre claimed these benefits from the claimant and said that the obligation applied to all stays within the five-year period.

Decision of the VGH Munich

The VGH Munich has cancelled the benefit decision. Key statements:

• The purpose of the declaration of commitment is decisive: it is intended to concrete, planned stay, for which the visa was applied for.

• If this stay ends due to Departure and if the invited person returns to his or her country of origin, the original commitment has been fulfilled.

• In case of doubt regularly assume that, that the obligation relates to a stay limited - not to any subsequent entry within five years.

• The only exception to this is if the authority Clear and unambiguous indicates that he or she should commit to several entries and stays.

The court thus emphasises: The five-year period describes the outermost frame; Whether several stays are actually covered within this framework is a question of the interpretation of the specific declaration of commitment.

5. visit visas versus humanitarian and asylum cases

5.1 Visitor visas (Schengen and national visits)

The following applies to classic visit visas (holiday, family visit, invitation from friends):

• The primary purpose of the declaration of commitment is to provide proof of Securing your livelihood for the requested stay.

• In practice, the standardised federal form declaration is usually used; the „Purpose of stay“ field then states „Visit“ or „Family visit“, for example.

• Courts are increasingly interpreting such declarations closely to the purpose of the visit:

  • Several decisions (VG Mainz, VG Weimar, VG Sigmaringen, VGH Baden-Württemberg, VGH Munich) are based on the assumption that the declaration is regularly not automatically all subsequent entries, but typically only the specifically planned visit.

For inviting parties this means
The clearer the Purpose of stay and the Duration The more time periods are described in the form and (if available) in supplementary declarations, the easier it will be to determine which periods are actually covered by the liability.

5.2 Humanitarian stays and asylum cases

The situation is quite different if a declaration of commitment is issued for the purpose of a humanitarian reception or in the environment of a asylum procedure is delivered.

Typical constellations:

• Declarations of commitment in the context of National admission programmes (e.g. for Syrian civil war refugees in accordance with Section 23 (1) AufenthG).

• Declarations of commitment to enable the entry of relatives who are later recognised as refugees as part of an asylum procedure.

Two decisions of the Federal Administrative Court are central here.

6 Federal Administrative Court, 13 February 2014, Ref.: BVerwG 1 C 4.13

6.1 Key statements of the judgement

In 2014, the Federal Administrative Court had to rule on the situation where a person had entered the country on a visit visa, later became an asylum seeker and was finally recognised as a refugee. The sponsor was obliged to reimburse asylum seeker benefits that had been granted during the asylum procedure.

The court has ruled:

1. Benefits under the AsylbLG are covered by the declaration of commitment.

2. The Refugee recognition leaves the reimbursement claim for benefits previously granted not cancelled retroactively.

3. From the perspective of EU law, there are no fundamental objections to such utilisation; in particular, it is permissible to make the granting of benefits dependent on need and, if necessary, to make use of third parties (obligors).

The legal situation at that time did not yet provide for a statutory five-year period; according to case law, liability ended in principle with Departure or the transition to a Residence permit for another purpose of residence.

6.2 Current significance (2025)

The judgement is still significant for today's legal situation for three main reasons:

• It confirms that Social benefits to which you are legally entitled (in particular AsylbLG, later Bürgergeld) are covered by Section 68 AufenthG.

• It clarifies that the Refugee recognition as such does not eliminate liability - this is precisely what the legislator later codified in Section 68 (1) sentence 4.

• For old cases (declarations of commitment before 6 August 2016), the decision, together with the subsequent amendments to the law, forms the starting point for many subsequent decisions by the higher administrative courts.

7 Federal Administrative Court, 26 January 2017, Ref.: BVerwG 1 C 10.16

In 2017, the Federal Administrative Court once again had to rule on declarations of commitment, this time in the typical context of the National reception programmes for Syrian civil war refugees.

7.1 Facts in brief

• In 2014, a sponsor had undertaken to provide for the living expenses of his Syrian relatives who were admitted on the basis of a state admission order in accordance with Section 23 (1) of the Residence Act.

• The relatives later applied for asylum and were recognised as refugees; they subsequently received benefits according to SGB II (today: citizen's allowance).

• The job centre claimed reimbursement of these benefits from the guarantor.

7.2 Decision and significance

The Federal Administrative Court ruled:

• „Purpose of stay“ within the meaning of the declaration of commitment is not identical with the individual residence permit, but is linked to the legal system of the purposes of residence.

• Humanitarian residence permits in accordance with Section 23 (1) and Section 25 (2) AufenthG both belong to the Section 5 (international law, humanitarian and political grounds) of the Residence Act; they therefore have the same overriding purpose of residence.

• The declaration of commitment therefore expires not due to the change from Sec. 23 (1) to Sec. 25 (2) AufenthG; liability continues as long as the relevant humanitarian purpose of residence exists (today: within the five-year period, or three years in the case of old cases under Sec. 68a AufenthG).

The highest court has thus clarified that, particularly in humanitarian admission cases, a change from „admission title“ to „refugee recognition“ increases liability. not ended automatically. The 2016 Integration Act reform enshrined this line in law.

8. current case law 2025: interpretation and limits of the declaration of commitment

In addition to the judgements of the Federal Administrative Court, the Higher Administrative Courts have clarified numerous detailed questions regarding the declaration of commitment in recent years - both for visit visas and for humanitarian constellations.

8.1 Ambiguities are the responsibility of the authority

VGH Baden-Württemberg, judgement of 27.02.2025 - 11 S 134/22

In a recent decision, the VGH Baden-Württemberg emphasised this:

• The declaration of commitment is a Declaration of intent requiring receipt. It must be interpreted in accordance with §§ 133, 157 BGB according to the objective horizon of the recipient.

• If a official form and it remains open after the interpretation whether the obligation also covers the Time after completion of an asylum procedure (e.g. after recognition as a refugee),

• these ambiguities at the expense of the authority or the job centre, which must be attributed to the design of the form.

In other words:
The more complicated and misleading the form is, the more likely it is that a court will recognise liability. narrower is laid out.

8.2 Written form mandatory - scans are not sufficient

VGH Baden-Württemberg, judgement of 07.12.2022 - 11 S 148/22

The VGH Baden-Württemberg has also ruled:

• The requirement set out in Section 68 (2) sentence 1 AufenthG Written form is governed by § 126 BGB.

• What is generally required is a original handwritten signature or an equivalent form (e.g. notarised certification).

• If the authority only one scan or printout of a signed declaration of commitment, there is no effective receipt of a declaration in due form; the declaration of commitment is then void, and there is No liability from § 68 AufenthG.

In practice, this means
Anyone who is supposed to have submitted a declaration of commitment may have compliance with the formal requirements critically checked - especially if only copies are available in the official file.

8.3 Change of purpose and end of liability

VG Halle, judgement of 26.02.2021 - 1 A 281/18 HAL

The VG Halle has ruled that liability arising from a declaration of commitment can end, if the purpose of residence actually changes, e.g:

• from a Residence permit for family reunification

• towards a Residence permit for humanitarian reasons (Section 25 (2) AufenthG),

and the declaration of commitment is recognisable by its content only to the family purpose of residence should be secured.

It is therefore worth taking a close look at the form and the accompanying documents, especially for constellations in which several residence permits follow one another.

9. avoidance on the grounds of error - rarely successful in practice

Theoretically, a declaration of commitment is a declaration of intent in accordance with the general rules of §§ 119 ff. BGB contestable, for example in the event of a significant error regarding the content or the legal consequences.

In practice, however, there are high hurdles to a successful challenge:

• Case law generally assumes that the issuer of the obligation at least knows that it is responsible for the Livelihood of the invited person - even if he is not aware of the full financial risk.

• Even significant misjudgements regarding the probable duration of an asylum procedure or the amount of benefits are usually No „pure content error“, but rather an error of motive that does not justify a challenge.

• In addition, in many cases the question arises as to whether a late declaration of avoidance is still within the deadline.

Courts are therefore very cautious and tend to refer obligors to

• one narrow interpretation the declaration and

• if necessary on Discretionary equity decisions of the authorities (e.g. deferral, payment by instalments, partial waiver of the claim in cases of particular hardship).

10. practical advice for persons who wish to submit a declaration of commitment

Anyone submitting a declaration of commitment - whether for a visit visa or in a humanitarian context - should be aware of this:

1. Liability period:

   • Principle: up to five years from entry.

   • Old obligations before 6 August 2016: max. three years (transitional right).

2. Scope of liability:

   • It's not just about occasional transfers to the guest, but about the Reimbursement of state benefits - often in substantial five-digit amounts.

3. Asylum and refugee cases:

   • If the invited person later applies for asylum and is recognised, liability does not end automatically.

   • It is precisely in these constellations that the demands from job centres and social welfare offices are often particularly high.

4. Read the form carefully:

   • The purpose („visit“, „family reunification“, „humanitarian admission“) and duration should be carefully examined.

   • Own restrictions (e.g. „max. 90 days“) should - if the authority agrees - be included in the Explanatory part be clearly recorded, not just in informational comment fields.

5. Credit check:

   • As a rule, the foreigners authority checks the financial capacity of the person making the commitment.

   • Nevertheless, the burden can later turn out to be significantly higher than originally thought due to lengthy proceedings.

11 Conclusion

In 2025, liability arising from declarations of commitment under Section 68 of the Residence Act is legally more clearly defined than it was ten years ago - but by no means harmless:

• The Five-year period (or three-year period in old cases) sets a clear framework.

• Especially in Humanitarian and asylum law constellations the declaration of commitment continues to apply even after the refugee has been recognised.

• The current case law strengthens the position of the person making the commitment in some respects (e.g. in the case of unclear forms, multiple entries or formal defects), but does not take away the fundamental risk.

Anyone wishing to submit a declaration of commitment - whether for a visit visa or as part of a humanitarian admission - should therefore seek detailed advice beforehand and carefully check whether the potential financial burden is acceptable in an emergency.

Lawyers in Cologne advise and represent you in immigration law.