Legal Analysis of Retroactive Payment and Recovery of Employee Basic Pension Insurance Premiums

The retroactive payment and collection of employee basic pension insurance premiums are critical measures for safeguarding fund security and protecting employees' pension rights. This paper analyzes the legal framework governing these practices based on the Social Insurance Law, the Provisional Regulations on the Collection of Social Insurance Premiums, and other relevant statutes. It integrates practical interpretations from documents such as the 2016 Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security Circular No. 132 and the 2022 Administrative Supervision Measures for Social Insurance Funds. The analysis systematically examines the subjects, objects, and content of the legal relationship in employee basic pension insurance, clarifying the distinction between retroactive payment (where the liable party voluntarily makes up the 2022 Administrative Supervision Measures for Social Insurance Funds, systematically analyzes the subjects, objects, and content of the legal relationship in basic employee pension insurance. It clarifies the distinction and causal relationship between supplementary payment (where the debtor voluntarily makes up the payment) and recovery (where the administrative authority enforces collection). The paper addresses academic disagreements regarding supplementary payment disputes ("labor dispute theory," "administrative dispute theory," and "social insurance dispute theory") and recovery disputes ("administrative penalty theory," "administrative coercive measure theory," and "administrative order theory"), ultimately concluding that supplementary payment constitutes a social insurance dispute while recovery constitutes an administrative order. Social Insurance Dispute Theory" versus the "Administrative Penalty Theory," "Administrative Compulsory Measures Theory," and "Administrative Order Theory" for recovery disputes. The analysis ultimately leans toward characterizing supplementary payments as social insurance disputes and recovery as administrative orders. By analyzing current issues such as regional inconsistencies in substantive rules for supplementary payments, procedural disconnects, misaligned responsibilities in enforcement authority for recovery actions, and inadequate enforcement measures, this study proposes improvement pathways—including unified standards for supplementary payments and optimized collaboration mechanisms for recovery actions—to provide legal support for resolving employees' rights protection challenges and strengthening social insurance fund oversight.