It is not an issue without contention the limitation period applicable to the right to revoke the acts of Community financial, either from an administrative perspective, or within courts (community and national) that are being asked to decide in this area. Nevertheless, when IFAP revoked the financial aid, the national and community jurisprudence was not yet settled as per the decision of the Supreme Administrative Court No. 1/2015, of 7 May 2015 (in the absence of national legislation foreseeing a period of limitation longer than the one set in Council Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No. 2988/95, of 18 December 1995, the latter is applicable). Also, if it would be considered that the debt was time-barred – position that would be contrary to the jurisprudence at the time –, the Ombudsman could not urge IFAP to make the refund since the aid repayment was made by fulfilling a «natural obligation» (paragraph 2, article No. 304 of the Civil Code). 6.3. Social rights 6.3.1. Ombudsman’s decisions favourable to complainants a) Suggestions Case Q-2658/16 Entity addressed: Secretary of State for Social Security and Social Security Institute (Instituto da Segurança Social, I.P.) Date: 2016.10.14 Subject: Application of self-employed workers’ contributory social security scheme provided by the Social Security Contribution Regimes Code Status: A response is awaited from the two entities addressed. However, the Social Security Institute has already accepted one of the Ombudsman suggestions related to the calculation of the annual remuneration for the granting of social security contributions exemption Having received several new complaints about the application of self-employed workers’ contributory social security scheme provided by the Social Security Contribution Regimes Code, the Ombudsman made new legislative amendment suggestions to the Secretary of State for Social Security and addressed remarks to the Social Security Institute in order to correct several administrative procedures. | 125