SUMMARIES OF SELECTED STATEMENTS 2015-62. Reopening pursuant to non-statutory rules of case concerning calculation of employment rate under Act on Tax Credits for Seniors A woman complained to the Ombudsman because ATP (the Danish Labour Market Supplementary Pension Scheme) and the ATP Appeals Board had declined to consider her objection that the statement of her employment rate for 2010 was incorrect. She explained that her employer had made an error when reporting her ATP contribution (on the basis of which a person’s employment rate is determined). The authorities declined to consider the woman’s objection on the grounds that she had not observed the time limit for objections. She had received a letter in June 2011 with information about her employment rate, in which it was also stated that any objections were to be lodged with ATP within three months. As the woman did not contact ATP until after expiry of the time limit, the authorities declined to consider her objection. The Ombudsman was unable to ascertain if the authorities had also considered whether the case could be reopened pursuant to the general non-statutory rules of administrative law on the reopening of cases. He therefore asked the authorities for a statement about whether the case could be reopened pursuant to the non-statutory rules. The authorities stated that the Act on Tax Credits for Seniors contains no provisions on exemption from the time limit for objections or on the reopening of cases. The authorities found that a case could be reopened pursuant to the non-statutory rules in the event of either particularly extenuating circumstances (such as serious illness) or errors on the part of an authority. However, an error made by an employer in the form of incorrect reporting of an ATP contribution or failure to report a contribution did not constitute grounds for reopening a case, even if correct reporting would have resulted in a different employment rate. Owing to the special characteristics of the rules of law applicable to objections to statements of employment rates, the Ombudsman found no grounds for repudiating the authorities’ general view. The possibilities of having cases concerning the calculation of employment rates reopened are thus more limited than what follows from the general non-statutory rules on the reopening of cases. 127