Sick leave in 2026: capped daily benefits and the employer impact

Quick answer. Since 1 April 2025, the sickness daily benefit (IJSS) is calculated on a salary capped at 1.4 times the minimum wage (instead of 1.8). The maximum benefit reaches EUR 41.95 gross per day for leave starting on or after 1 February 2026, then EUR 42.97 from 1 July 2026. The gap to fill now weighs more heavily on the employer.

Sick leave is not only a human-resources matter: it is a cost line that shifted in 2026. The share covered by social security has been reduced, and the difference falls mechanically on the employer or on the group insurance contract. For salaries above 1.4 times the minimum wage, the extra cost is no longer marginal.

We support directors of very small and small businesses on payroll and labour matters, and we see that this cap reform often goes unnoticed until a senior employee's first long leave. That is precisely when the gap becomes visible in cash flow. This article explains the mechanism, quantifies the employer cost, and sets out a concrete action plan.

The sickness daily benefit (IJSS) equals 50% of the basic daily wage, calculated over the last three months of gross salary. That principle has not moved. What changed is the cap on the reference salary.

Since 1 April 2025, the salary used for this calculation is capped at 1.4 times the minimum wage, down from 1.8 previously. Direct consequence: the maximum IJSS amount has fallen, and any employee paid above 1.4 times the minimum wage sees a larger share of their pay fall outside the social security indemnification.

The maximum sickness IJSS is therefore EUR 41.95 gross per day for leave starting on or after 1 February 2026, then EUR 42.97 gross per day for leave starting on or after 1 July 2026, following the minimum-wage increase on 1 June 2026.

The IJSS is only paid from the fourth day of leave: social security applies a three-day waiting period. The first three days give no benefit from the health insurance fund.

Our reading. The core of the issue is not the absolute fall in the IJSS, but the shift of the boundary: at 1.4 times the minimum wage, many more employees are affected by a cap on their benefit. A manager, a qualified technician or an experienced sales representative frequently exceeds this threshold. For these profiles, social security covers a smaller fraction of the salary than before, and the rest shifts to the salary top-up or the group insurance.

The monthly-pay law requires the employer, subject to a length-of-service condition, to top up the IJSS to guarantee a certain level of pay. The scale is set out in article D1226-1 of the labour code: a top-up to 90% of gross pay during a first period, then to 66.66% (two thirds) during a second period, whose duration depends on length of service.

This statutory top-up has its own waiting period. The employer indemnification only starts from the eighth day of leave, i.e. a seven-day waiting period (article D1226-3 of the labour code), unless a collective agreement or a more favourable arrangement reduces or removes this delay.

Two waiting-period logics therefore overlap:

1. The three-day social security waiting period, which delays IJSS payment to the fourth day.
2. The seven-day statutory top-up waiting period, which delays the employer complement to the eighth day, save for a more favourable collective provision.

The interaction between the capped IJSS and the employer complement determines the company's real remaining cost. The more the salary exceeds 1.4 times the minimum wage, the larger the share the employer must fund to reach 90% then two thirds. This complement mechanism is detailed in our article on subrogation and salary top-up.

The reasoning is simple: the employer (or its group insurance contract) fills the difference between the capped IJSS and the pay level it must maintain. When the cap drops from 1.8 to 1.4 times the minimum wage, this difference widens for every employee above the cap.

We do not quantify a precise individual case here without knowing the collective agreement, length of service and exact pay: each file requires its own calculation. But the principle is constant: the higher the pay, the more the lower cap widens the gap funded outside social security.

Common case. A director we support employs several managers paid well above 1.4 times the minimum wage. During a long leave of one of them, he discovered that the IJSS covered a much smaller share than expected, and that his old group insurance contract, calibrated on the former cap, left a direct remaining cost on payroll. The issue was not compliance but cash flow: an unanticipated cost over several months.

The underestimated risk. Many companies have an old group insurance contract whose cover was sized on the 1.8 cap. If the contract indemnifies as a complement to the IJSS without an adjustment clause, the lower cap may either widen the employer's remaining cost or, conversely, increase the demand on the contract. Either way, the real cost differs from what was budgeted.

Subrogation lets the employer receive the IJSS directly from social security, instead of the employee, when it maintains all or part of the salary. In practice, the company pays the maintained salary to the employee, then recovers the IJSS from the health insurance fund.

This mechanism does not change the total amount of the indemnification, but it smooths cash flow and spares the employee from advancing funds. It also secures monitoring: the employer knows what it receives and what it actually funds.

In practice. For subrogation to work without friction, three elements must be in place: a salary certificate sent without delay (most often through the event-based DSN), a correct subrogation mention, and monitoring of the health insurance fund's payments into the company account. A late or incorrect certificate delays the IJSS collection and distorts the payroll reconciliation. Payroll tools such as Silae or PayFit automate the certificate issuance and the complement calculation, which reduces this risk.

Watch points for 2026. Three topics deserve a review before the next long leave in the company:

• The applicable collective agreement, which may provide a more favourable top-up than the statutory scale (reduced waiting period, higher rate, longer duration): it prevails when more favourable.
• The group provident insurance contract, whose cover must be reviewed in light of the 1.4 cap, particularly for high salaries.
• The payroll software configuration, to check that the cap, the waiting period and the complement are up to date, and that subrogation is correctly declared.

These checks fall within payroll and labour management and, more broadly, within the company's administrative and accounting management. They are part of the regular dialogue with your chartered accountant, alongside your provident insurance broker.

Temporary work deserves specific attention because of how length of service and successive contracts are handled: we dedicate an article to sick leave in temporary work. If you are setting up your first payroll, the logic of salary top-up and group cover is prepared from hiring, as we explain when you hire your first employee.

What the administration looks at. Scrutiny focuses mainly on the consistency of the declared elements: the salary certificate must reflect the gross salaries of the three reference months, the waiting periods must be respected, and the IJSS repaid under subrogation must be accurate. A gap between the declared salary and actual payroll, or a late certificate, is the first friction point. Documentary rigour protects the company and speeds up the indemnification.

• Identify employees paid above 1.4 times the minimum wage, the most exposed to a remaining cost during leave.
• Review the group provident insurance contract and compare its cover with the new cap.
• Check the collective agreement: waiting period, rate and duration of the top-up.
• Confirm the payroll software configuration (IJSS cap, waiting period, complement, subrogation).
• Activate or strengthen subrogation to steer cash flow.
• Anticipate the budget overrun for high salaries in the social forecast.