Finland rejects 'false' claims its basic income trial has failed: 'Proceeding as planned'
Series of media reports claimed Finnish government had decided not to expand trial
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Finland has denied widespread claims its basic income experiment has fallen flat.
A series of media reports said the Finnish government had decided not to expand its trial – a version of events which has been repudiated by officials.
Miska Simanainen, a social affairs official, said the trial, where about 2,000 unemployed people aged 25-58 are being paid a tax-free €560 (£490) monthly income with no questions asked, was "proceeding as planned."
The €20m programme, which seeks to reform Finland's social security system, ends in December, at which point Prime Minister Juha Sipila's centre-right government will assess initial results.
Reports have said the government social affairs agency has requested up to €70m in extra funding this year, something Mr Simanainen says is false.
Finland became the first country in Europe to start the basic income experiment in January 2017.
Supporters of basic income argue it would help get unemployed people into temporary jobs, rather than forcing them to remain unemployed to qualify for benefits.
They say it would provide a safety net, address insecurities associated with workers not having full-time staff contracts, and help boost mobility in the labour market as people would have a source of income between jobs.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments