Program cost of the french Nouveau Front Populaire program

Press conference given by Nouveau Front Populaire, detailing the cost of its 2024 program.

Hello everyone welcome to this press conference Yann brossa senator from Paris spokesperson for the Communist Party very happy to see you here we are going to present to you our macroeconomic proposal the costing of our program program that as you know we have for our part to present .

I say this because that is not the case for all the others and on the occasion of this press conference four representatives of the Nouveau Front Populaire will succeed one another at this platform after me Alexandre wizy Éric cqurel and Eva SAS then three economists will bring their view on our proposal Elois Laurent Éric Bert and Julia Caget this costing of our program you know it comes the day after Gabriel hatal's press conference which we benefited from his lessons in all areas, he even ventured into social territory by explaining that a victory for the Nouveau Front Populaire would be a catastrophe on the social level. Basically, listening to him, .

I say to myself that it's a bit madof who explains to the poor that Robin des Boois is going to pick their pockets. It seems essential to us, at the start of this press conference, to say a few words about the results of those who are leaving the results of the infernal trio Macron Attale the mayor because they have a lot of demanding towards others but ultimately it must first be the time to look at what they have produced at the head of the State, firstly an unprecedented deterioration of public finances since the deficit is increased from 2.3% of GDP in 2018 to 5.5% of GDP in 2023 direct consequence of fiscal disarmament organized by the State direct consequence also of the mismanagement organized by the State more than 200 billion euros of t published to companies without compensation, as far as we are concerned we are absolutely not opposed to companies being helped but we believe that these must be subject to conditions and that when these conditions are not met they must be reimbursed therefore degradation of public finances economic deterioration with a blatant failure of supply policy which had the main consequence of an increase in the corporate margin rate which rose from 30.8% in 2017 to 32.7% in 2023 and an absolute record distribution of div idends and then finally a deterioration that everyone can see in the social context we are the 7th economic power in the world and we have 9 million poor people with consumption at the floor, all of this producing a vicious circle in which we are today trapped and it is precisely with this logic that we want to break and this is what Eva SAS will explain to you hello .

I am Eva SAS .

I am a former member of the finance committee and indeed the program of the Nouveau Front Populaire is a Immediate and clear break with Emmanuel Macron's policy, unlike the program of other political groups and in particular that of the national gathering, a program which gives priority to purchasing power over public service and ecological bifurcation, a program which goes hand in hand with the fiscal disarmament a program which above all repositions the state as an actor in the economy a state which revives purchasing power which guides investments which revives public procurement also it is important and a state which therefore leads the entire economy in a virtuous circle so .

I said our priority is purchasing power purchasing power is the rise in pensions and the ax but it is also the rise in wages the rise in index point of course and the increase in the minimum wage to €1,600 net, an increase of 14%. it's necessary because we don't live decently on €1,400 net per month and it's positive for businesses it's positive for two reasons firstly it will stimulate consumption and therefore the turnover of many companies this will also be the case for public procurement with for example the school renovation programs which will fill the order books and the second reason is that it will also facilitate recruitment, particularly in sectors which struggle to recruit due to lack of of sufficient remuneration but we know that in the first months it can be difficult for certain TP SMEs we are often asked the question for certain associations also and we want to be clear on this point we will help them we will help them through several mechanisms of 0% advance schemes schemes for resuming their financial burden and financial support measures for those who need them temporary measures but we will be alongside VSE SMEs for those who will have difficulties facing the increase in SMIC and finally a last word we are attentive to training we want work which is decent and which gives meaning so we will strengthen the training times which allow career paths of retraining and training which also allows not only to be oriented towards immediate employability but towards career paths throughout life well hello everyone I'm going to talk to you about what will happen immediately if we arrive at responsibilities the air Macron is finished in a few days he won't nothing will remain and what we are proposing is a break, a quiet break because it is a break which will put the country in a good social order which will put it back to functioning and we are doing this by repositioning the state the State is no longer this spectator who watches let it happen and lets it pass the state once again becomes the actor who organizes social redistribution and who organizes ecological planning and we therefore begin immediately by putting out extinguishing the social fire with measures which are extremely clear and precise, first the two repeals, the repeal of the pension reform and the repeal of the unemployment insurance reform which marks CE quinquena of the leap of injustice then with obviously on power of purchase a total commitment of the Nouveau Front Populaire with the increase in the minimum wage Eva said it to the tune of 1600 € an increase of 14 % but also but also for civil servants an increase in the Adis point of 10% .

I remind you that over the period 2017-222 civil servants lost a net 10% of purchasing power we are restoring them to their rights and then from September national education will be truly national since both the canteen and the extracurricular activities at the same time the trans trans will fall within the scope of what the State finances for families and then we will also end up where the injustice began Emmanuel Macron inaugurated the quinquena by reducing the aPL we will increase aid for housing for 10%. the costing of these measures is 25 billion euros over the year 2024 obviously in a full year ERC will come back to this for 2025 what this on what this means but for the immediacy for the moment that we have it is 25 billion euros but we finance them with revenues that are quite simple to understand there is idle money in our country, unproductive money and therefore we are immediately reintroducing an ISF with a climate component of 15 billion euros and above all and above all we are putting back in place this we are putting in place sorry this imposition of super profits that we have requested every year from Parliament every year and which also brings in 15 billion euros this is what we are doing immediately then will come for the year 2025 the time for ecological reconstruction the time for the reconstruction of our public services and it is the president of the finance committee of the National Assembly who will talk to you about it, thank you, thank you, so we understood from the start for emergency measures which are both signals sent and measures which deceive purchasing power and which break with the years of macronism and from 2025 on measures most of which will have been implemented in 2024, particularly at the level of draft finance law 2000 end of 2024 for 2025 we are bifurcating in a structural way uh from .

I was going to say from two resources from two vectors this vector is the idea of ​​distributing to share the wealth to ensure that the great migration of labor towards capital and not just any capital, uninvested capital, div idend capital, shareholder capital and well go back in the other direction, that is to say towards labor income so as to deer power of purchase that is the sharing of the added value but also goes back in the direction through the revenues that we will recover from the most important tax gifts which were made to the richest by the septena one could say of Emmanuel Macron so it's time for this to end uh on and who will not touch .

I want to reaffirm 92% of French people who will not see their tax system transformed or on the contrary even see it reduced these measures uh so at the same time make it possible to meet the needs in terms of health education two terms moreover you .

I would like to tell you with the term ecology which comes behind in ecological transition absolutely count uh uh how to say not pronounced yesterday by Mr. Bardella for whom obviously these questions are not problematic for us they are central and we need from this point of view investment from a strategic state which will make it possible to transform the souls of the modes of production and to respond to the needs of the French and .

I also said it obviously on the question of sharing the added value so this year 2025 public spending could reach 100 billion euros with the hiring of teachers to reduce the number of students per class you know that we set ourselves the objective of reaching the OECD average of 19 students per class a multi-year plan for recruiting care and medico-social professionals revaluation of salary professions intensification of thermal renovation which will increase, .

I was going to say, in charge at over the years strengthening of the structuring of French renewable energy sectors and introduction of an autonomous guarantee which supplements the income of young people located below the poverty line which is ultimately a measure of extremely important share of purchasing power but also confidence in young people so that they can somewhere do their studies without, .

I was going to say, always having to take precarious jobs to say the least. That represents in total because we want to balance 100 billion in tax revenue so they will be registered on the PLF ineffective and unfair tax suppression tax on .

I was going to say the highest assets so it is not a question of touching the heritage of the very large part of the French, the majority of whom moreover do not have not at all in terms of inheritance but to put an end to the abuses from this point of view the establishment of a scale of 14 tax brackets and a progressiveness of the CSG and elimination of the flat tax which is obviously fundamental since it is with the flat tax linked to the ISF the gifts that Mr. Macron has, .

I will say, enabled the richest holders of capital who have been able to inflate their income in terms of div idend and share repurchase .

I remind you which have doubled in volume since 2017 this is this first period which ends a second period opens for 2026-2027 it is that of the transformation where we transform in depth the the country we make popular neighborhoods of rurality of the culture of sport ecological planning which is obviously a key word of our strategic state and there we tackle the question of rail transport and in particular freight with a large plan we guarantee access to public services all these .

I was going to say neighborhoods all these towns all these small towns all these areas in France which today are too deprived of them we support the organic sector and agroecology we adopt a comprehensive law to fight against sexist and sexual violence, we increase the culture budget by 1% and we recruit the civil servants we need to be able to ensure this return to a strategic state but also all this effort in terms of education and health. is this brings the total to 150 billion euros in revenue which we complete with the measures planned in previous years with the application of the zuukman tax you know it is the famous tax which allows depending on the figure of business of a multinational in France .

I was going to say to rectify the profits that it declares with in particular thanks to the transfer price it is the rise of policy in favor of equal pay and it is the strengthening of tax on financial transactions .

I just end on one thing afterwards obviously well it will depend on what happens in 2027 we intend to continue to govern the country to continue to transform in depth and do what we will not have had time to do do uh .

I uh just say a word of conclusion on the question of retirement at 60 we intend to propose a major law before 2027 on retirement at 60 but which .

I was going to say will be based on the work that we will do with the social partners uh we already have elements but which will be part of the intragovernmental discussion but especially of the discussion with our social partners but we have obviously not forgotten this objective .

I will pass the floor immediately to hois Laurent Julia cager Eric Bert les three economists who agreed to be here with us uh this morning well uh so hello I'm going to introduce myself quickly to tell you uh why I'm here and uh and then what .

I have to tell you so .

I 'm ellois Laurent .

I am an economist .

I am an academic uh .

I was invited to take an independent look .

I would not say neutral but independent on this program .

I would like to clarify that .

I did not write a line of this program and that therefore .

I am not defending here not my proposals of agreement, on the other hand it seems essential to me to take a look which is therefore not a neutral look because it is inspired by the economic discipline and to tell you perhaps that economics in the 21st century can shed light on this program is a conference on the question of costing and financing it is therefore a conference on what we call credibility .

I would like as an economist to warn you against this idea of ​​credibility credibility heard in a very narrow sense accounting credibility budgetary credibility it can be totally counterproductive conversely there are social spending measures which may seem not credible and which can completely change the situation when Léon Bloom proposes the program of the Popular Front in June 1936 there is an economist who 4 months earlier wrote a fundamental book which is the general theory and his name is John Meard Kees and what Kees will show is that a social expenditure can become an investment and that 'a social expenditure which is made in the name of social justice can be economically effective therefore we must understand this overlapping of the question of the Popular Front and Kenesianism to understand how social expenditure can be economically effective conversely it It is important to understand that certain random reforms, pension reform, can be carried out in the name of a certain budgetary credibility, so always ask yourself when you are told about the credibility of who you want to be believed if you want to be believed by the European authorities and that you are making a pension reform which you have 80% of people against it is possible that 2 years later you will have 10 more points for the extreme right and that it is not only the stability of public accounts which is in question but the rule of law so this is what credibility can lead to credibility it can be exterminating there is something like an exterminating credibility which we must be wary of when we look at things from an economic point of view and what's more we are in a world complex we are in a world of shock which means that credibility requires dynamic pressure you can be credible one day and then covid arrives for example you want to be credible and you massively reduce social spending you reform unemployment insurance randomly and then covid arrives and there you no longer have unemployment insurance you have reduced damage insurance it costs you four times more to deal with a shock like covid this is what the United States has learned that it cost the United States much more to deal with covid than Europe because in Europe we have a welfare state so credibility we have to be careful with that doesn't mean we have nothing to say on the economic level but .

I would suggest evaluating things in terms of coherence .

I will quickly offer you my analysis of the situation these elections are the central issue of these elections it is the stability of the French social contract in a world disoriented by shocks the stability of the French social contract in a world disoriented by shocks the question is what are the major columns what is the backbone of this French social contract in my opinion for half a century the French social contract French is on the one hand solidarity and on the other diversity solidarity is the fact that there is one/ers of economic wealth which is shared by a system of taxes and transfers the French adhere massively to this solidarity and on the other hand it is diversity you have 20 % of the French population which is either an immigrant or of immigrant descent so the question that must be asked is these two pillars of the French model solidarity and diversity how we protect them in a shock in a world disoriented by shocks that's it and that's the essential question so do we have to play one against the other is- what we must preserve both and project them into the future with an additional dimension the third dimension in a sense of the French model which is dynamic the question of resilience and here .

I would like to say a word to finish so my meaning this program agrees and the program which most coherently defends the French social contract in this world disoriented by shocks you have on the one hand a government program which reduces the social contract to the balance of public accounts without however respect it and on the other hand you have a program which is the program of the extreme right which proposes a program for the security of property and people by calling into question the rule of law there you have a problem of internal coherence it is you have both a problem of external coherence in relation to the world as it is and a problem of internal coherence in these two programs this program is coherent on the internal level it is coherent in a temporal way because it proposes a sequencing of horizons and so .

I end with the ecological question we cannot in the 21st century make ecology a scarecrow we must make it an opportunity we cannot have as the only unit of account the billion euros ago also the years of life expectancy there are also the tons of CO2 avoided there are also the living species protected okay so having a plural vision of human well-being which is what this program proposes is fundamental and so to the third to the first two dimensions solidarity and diversity .

I will add a third which is the question of resilience if you take this program in three dimensions solidarity diversity and resilience you have in my opinion a coherent program and that is why that .

I look at him in a favorable light, thank you for your attention yes hello .

I would like to return to the question of trust because the main interest of the program there of the Nouveau Front Populaire compared to the programs that this either from the RN or from Emmanuel Macron's program it is because it carries a shock of confidence we often talk about a shock and well there it carries a shock of confidence because economists know that without confidence nothing it is possible we can define all the best and most beautiful policies that we want if people think that tomorrow is going to be worse than today and well households will not consume businesses will not invest so we are at a moment in history where after this year of macro this year of macronism have really fractured society by creating economic fragility the recent deterioration of notes eh we can try to take lessons from Bruno Lemire but even so it was recalled he 1000 billion euros of debt more under since Emmanuel Macron came to power deterioration of notes so the people who are not serious they are they are still in power for the moment therefore fragility economic and that is not likely to establish confidence social precariousness that too and .

I recall climate inaction so .

I insist a little heavily on that but the heart of the program is to respond to both the social emergency and the ecological emergency and therefore the measures, whether spending measures or revenue measures, all have the objective of participating in restoring this confidence, regaining hope, we have a certain number of fellow citizens who have difficulty making ends meet so it is normal that we help them this program it is also fundamentally human it is not just statistics or figures and percentages it is dealing with the concrete problems of uh people so that's that's why uh well .

I personally find that this program is the one that is up to the challenge that we are experiencing so restoring confidence is is to restore greater visibility for households, as we have said, with certain measures increasing the minimum wage, blocking certain prices and so on, it is also supporting businesses and in particular VSEs and SMEs to give them visibility and visibility for companies it will also be achieved by public investments and the return of the State as an economic actor to lead behind it the private sector and do not be afraid beyond a few increases in labor costs due to the increase in the minimum wage if companies see that the order books are filling the effect in the end it will be largely positive therefore and that too to regain social cohesion and .

I will end there since Julia will address this question it we must uh find more justice more social justice it is yet another element of this cohesion thank you hello thank you so my name is Julia cager .

I am a professor of economics and .

I would like to explain to you why .

I decided to being here today, economics is not a hard science and Lois Laurent was right to point out that in a certain way it has a fairly limited predictive power, economics is a social science on the other hand associated with history allows us to evaluate what worked in the past and what did not work in the past. The assessment that we can make of the last 7 years of Emmanuel Macron's power is that his tax policy unfair which consisted of abolishing the wealth tax and transforming it into a tax on real estate wealth which consisted of putting an end to the progressive taxation of capital with the introduction of what is called a flat tax or a single flat-rate levy of 30% which consisted of putting an end to the exit tax this tax policy was a failure it's not me he says it's the evaluation committee of the tax reform of capital put in place by Emmanuel Macron himself with in particular France strategy this tax policy has not led to any additional investment no additional job creation and no increase in the growth rate of the economy on the other hand it has had a consequence extremely clear it has led to a very strong increase in inequalities if you take the last years in France today let's look for example at the distribution of div idends 01% of French taxpayers receive 2 T.

I of the total div idends received in France if you take the evolution of the 500 largest fortunes in France today these 500 largest fortunes they represented approximately 10 % of GDP 10 years ago they represent 50% of GDP today we could discuss the relevance of this increase in economic inequalities if this increase in economic inequalities was done for the benefit of growth or employment, this was not the case, so what the Nouveau Front Populaire is proposing today is to introduce tax justice because Eric is right to point out that consent to tax is one of the dimensions of creating trust and through this fiscal justice to allow the financing of more public education, public health, public research .

I come to tell you what has not worked in the past .

I could highlight what has worked in the past productivity per hour worked in France a century ago was around €5. productivity per hour worked in France today is around €60. how we increased productivity per hour worked over the last century by investing massively in universities in research and education this policy must be reintroduced today over the last 10 years public spending per student at university in France it decreased by 15%. we do not prepare for the future by spending less on our youth in research and at university and that is what the program of the Nouveau Front Populaire promises today. There is a policy of recovery partly through power of purchase increase in the minimum wage indexation of wages to inflation but there is also and it is essential a long-term investment policy; it is only in this way that we will recreate confidence in growth and employment with jobs that will be quality jobs and jobs that will be well paid the second reason .

I will be brief why .

I am here is the following today we can no longer do politics only with women and men in politics, politics must also be done with civil society, that is to say with the associative world with the world of research with the unions and this is what the new front is doing popular for weeks there hasn't been much time to make the program there hasn't been much time to get the campaign going since Emmanuel Macron gave 3 weeks to organize elections and despite everything the women and men of the Nouveau Front Populaire relies today on the world of research, the associative world and the unions it is a question of building the future and this is also seen in the economic proposals of the Nouveau Front Populaire for example with the establishment of democratic governance within companies one/ers of seats for employees on the boards of directors of companies there is only by giving more democracy of political democracy but also more democracy in companies to employees by strengthening the role of intermediary bodies these intermediary bodies that Emmanuel Macron has damaged so much over the last 7 years that we will also rebuild a growth path for France that's it and .

I think that now we can move on to the questions and answers Angel cal from the Spanish press agency F you know announced that you are going to start spending this year if .

I understood correctly C 2 billion you are going to put in new bones .

I imagine that it will be rather next year there has questions of deficit which are which are important .

I believe that you are thinking of renegotiating the Stability PACT which was just finished not very long ago how do you think of doing it and especially with whom in what way how are you going to argue that you want to redo what has just been done hello Tibao petit for TF1 LC.

I Jean-Luc Mélanchon talks about costing the program over 5 years of 200 billion euros of spending for 230 billion euros 'euros of revenue .

I don't seem to have heard the figure this morning do you confirm it or on the contrary do you correct it you rectify it uh hello Johnson Financial Times given the state of public finances you you mentioned earlier do you fear a reaction in the bond markets following these expenditures someone .

I will answer finally in any case at least partially to the first two questions uh the first on the renegotiation of the Fiscal Compact note that it it's not as if we were taking a situation where this pact was respected uh that's the least we can say since we today have a deficit which is announced for the end of the year which is much higher not only than the deficit theoretically admitted but in addition even to that planned again at the end of 2023 by the government which also gave the lesson was wrong in the broad outlines again .

I say Wrong to be diplomatic well so the the the what we have what we have announced you will notice in the emergency situation uh the expenses correspond exactly to the additional revenues that we put on the table through a amending finance bill so to answer you yes for the future we are counting in particular on from 2027 count on the multiplier effect that our policy can have we will say neo-Enesian in Fort reland ecological but in this case this summer we will not increase the deficit on the second thing in relation to Jean Mélenchon you will notice that the program that we quantify here short precisely until 2027 uh and uh if you calculate things a little if you add but we did not want to go into because we need to refine the proposal that we will actually make in detail on the pensions we are not very far in reality from what is said on 5 by Jean-Luc Mélenchon at least not on the large scales and .

I point out to you that Jean-Luc Mélenchon spoke about the etf.

I proposal and here we we are on a proposal which adapts to the program of the Nouveau Front Populaire but things are not quantitatively very different between 3 years and 5 years hello Romain Clusel for RMC .

I have two questions first on the ISF that you did you announce that it would bring in 15 billion from this year? First of all, this 15 billion is also valid for the following years and how do you arrive at this figure of 15 billion, we were very far from it uh for the ISF previous version we are going to say and concerning the pension reform you mentioned a passage in any case a law which would arrive for 2027 before 2027 does that mean that there is a repeal of the reform which is in the process of of implementation before is this being done at the time of this law here to have this precision thank you hello Antoine Oberdorf for the opinion uh .

I would like to question you on the post of this morning from Olivier Blanchard the former chief economist of the IMF which is often discussed when it comes to multiplier since he had made a sum in relation to the errors committed at the time of the Greek crisis or Olivier Blanchard tells us that he is very worried about the nature of the economic program uh of the Nouveau Front Populaire and in particular the margin rates of marginal taxation rates which appear to him as confiscatory so what do you have to respond to that hello hello Ren honored by Echo Journal .

I have two questions if you are elected you will very quickly have to negotiate with Brussels we will talk about it a little bit uh since you will be in France is in the excessive deficit procedure what will be the deficit trajectory that you announced Valérie Rabo in different figures on Tuesday saying that we would be above 5% over several years this program would lead to what level of deficit and debt on the horizon 2027 uh and second thing you insist a lot on the recovery that this will imply for the French economy concretely your program foresees what level of what level of growth and maybe just a third thing .

I admit .

I still haven't understood what the final figure for additional spending was by 2027 and especially additional revenue from 2027 if you can specify exactly what you mean in the figures that there are a lot of figures even for echo journalists that's a lot hello .

I am .

I can .

I ask it or we wait ok hello Lisala for the media yesterday Boris Valallot in front of the MEDEF spoke of economic patri-patriotism that large companies had to participate in a sort of patriotism so is that really the word in terms of what .

I hear today in relation to the tax injustice and above all also it is linked are you going to make differences between large companies and SME VSEs on tax rates or that kind of thing thank you .

I will say a little word regarding the Olivier Blanchard's post since he is my colleague uh Olivier Blanchard you are right uses the word confiscatory confiscatory it is a moral judgment it is not an economic judgment so .

I would simply like to have an economic discussion with him on the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of having uh marginal tax rates higher than what we observe today on the taxation of capital on the taxation of income and on the taxation of assets and this discussion he has not not started it turns out that he has already done one but you were right to recall him at the time of the Greek crisis since in fact he was one of those economists who were ultimately to put in place a policy of economic rigor and we saw the disaster scenario that this brought about not only for Greece but for all the economies of the European Union at the same time when the United States was emerging much more quickly from the crisis thanks to a recovery policy and .

I I'm just going to say a very short word about the tax on force, there are two things here, one the situation of heritage and .

I recalled it earlier has evolved in France since 2017 when .

I noted it's not me who it is the challenge magazine that the 500 largest fortunes had gone from 10% to 50% of GDP that means that when we are going to tax even if we had the same range and the same levy rates as in 2007 in fact we would have de facto higher revenues it turns out that the ISF as it was in place in 2017 we could qualify it as an ISF yesterday moreover .

I think that this is one of the reasons why it It was also easy for Emmanuel Macron to delete it because it didn't bring in much. .

I think he suffered from two problems: one, he didn't bring in enough of these revenues, they were n't sufficiently targeted, that's why 'on a personal level but civil society is also there to go a little beyond the parties .

I would be to target this new ISF for example to finance public infrastructures of public health of public education but that's another question well it was the base had a hole there the idea is to increase the marginal rates with a base which will no longer have a hole and therefore that is what means that we will go from yes 4 to 5 billion for what is reported in 2017 to a tax system which should bring in around 12 13 billion during the first years with the program of the Nouveau Front Populaire on the ISF in fact the effects of concentration .

I think that Julia answered the question very well on the fact that obviously it was going to drain more revenue even with identical rates on the question on the trajectory of public finances .

I think that Eric said things very well in fact we have expenditure which covers revenue so by definition there is there is no possible increase in the public deficit and if we go further and .

I would even say that we were relatively cautious, that is to say that we took until 2027 as if there were no had no effect of boosting growth on our debt ratio since obviously you know that the debt is a ratio with the debt in the numerator and the GDP at the bottom we did we covered things as if there were no had no ripple effect from the economy in the way we calculated things so we were extremely careful to make sure that we did not degrade the uh debt to GDP ratio so for once from that point of view .

I think we are clear on uh Mr. Blanchard well, .

I 'm not my colleague so .

I can say things a little more directly uh even if .

I absolutely even if .

I studied what he has also made with interest you said Olivier Blanc Blchard's analyzes led to one of the most serious errors in the conduct of economic policy that the beginning of the 21st century has known, that is to say that the Greece has consolidated in catastrophic proportions, ruining its economy, ruining its population, based on figures from the IMF and Mr. Oliviernchard, which he admitted in his exhibitions that they were false, so .

I am not taking any precautions because someone says that things are conservatories from this point of view, so we are therefore counting on the fact that this policy which targets the popular classes in particular of which you know that the proportion to consume is greater than the high incomes will necessarily create an effect on demand and on growth in our country .

I don't know if .

I forgot a question but .

I don't think so it's good s on the r then on the r we were very clear .

I think that's it it is but not visibly enough it is repeal in the summer of agreement and reflection on because we have placed in our program the horizon of retirement at 60 years of reflection to ensure that we have a proposal debated with the social partners we are not going to do .

I mean we have criticized Macron enough on the brutality of his methods so that on a reform so engaging we all get back around the table so the idea is discussion social consultation on uh the retirement uh on the retirement horizon at 60 Celen poul .

I just said one thing .

I am quite surprised on the confiscatory question because if you look closely at what we are proposing from a tax point of view in reality it amounts to say that capital income must be taxed like work income and as far as .

I know we are not accused today of having confiscatory measures on work income so .

I am very surprised .

I still remind you of this study d'pp public policy institute made with Bery last year which shows that the 175 billionaires of this country have an income tax which is well below 2% agree when for example employees who are in the bracket of the richest 1% are taxed at almost 50% so the least we can say is that yes we are claiming it is to still take a little more from those who have no confiscatory measures today 'today because for the moment they are on marginal tax rates which are almost zero so we are claiming it like this Solen Poulnec for the echoes a follow-up on the question of my colleague Renault so you are not degrading the deficit but what you you still aim to improve it while we are in the process of an excessive deficit uh secondly on the question of pensions could you be a little more precise on how much the repeal of the pension reform of 2023, in this repeal do you intend to call into question the relaxation of the long-career systems and also the increase in the contributory minimum and on the cost anyway which of a repeal of the reform finally d ' a remission of a return forgiven for retirement at age 60, what should be included in your program or not and with what range perhaps you could give us to have an idea hello .

I continue, sorry for insisting but could you give us the overall costing of your program because in fact there have been debates on between Valérie Rabau between Jean-Luc Mélenchon costing so please to 2027 and over the 5 year horizon, moreover, you criticized a lot last fall and a prior.

I finally a posterior.

I the figures proved you right uh the government's growth forecasts on what forecast are you basing your program for 2024 and 2025 thank you sorry here she knows that in the world .

I just wanted to ask you do you take into account the optimization strategies of economic actors in the revenue part finally what you are going to tax more the big fortunes and big companies but they are by definition economic actors who who who who who adjust in fact the tax masses they move they go abroad the fortunes move have you taken into account this of what can happen and and in the way you calculated your revenues uh and on the alignment of capital labor Mr. Coocrel said we are going to align the taxation of capital with that of labor François Hollande tried to do it in 2012 according to you why is it ultimately it was not successful thank you hello uh have you decided on the income tax scale the 14 brackets that you want to establish same question for the CSG and that on the taxation the transmissions hello uh what are the tax loopholes pollutants that you plan to abandon and how much they would bring you one by one thank you yeah you want you want to go well maybe maybe first on the one by one you will be given at the end of this discussion detailed things so .

I think you will have enough to answer this question on the side one by one for for the question which related to Valérie rabau .

I repeat the three limits that we gave 25 billion this year 100 billion at the end of 2025 150 at the end of 2027 in fact you see and the end of 2027 Eric gave the usual precautions since he said that there was a presidential election planned normally for the first half of 2027 and that therefore obviously the end of 2027 limit is a little different but so if we look at the 100 billion in 2025 and even the 2026-227 trajectory we are around 125 in 2026 if we take an average and therefore we realize that we are in fact close to the calculation which was proposed by Valérie rabot we are in the same order of magnitude of what she proposed knowing that we have obviously refined it was still the objective of this joint work to refine things from this point of view uh that's it for this point can you you can me I'm sorry because there were a lot of questions well the costing Global 25 100 150 so the recipes finally then we have it we presented the recipes cover expenses each time, this is what .

I was trying to tell you earlier about the conservative plan that we had, we did not consider that growth covered part of the expenses, we put in front of the revenues in the program opposite the expenditures of the revenues on the question which was asked on have we planned the optimization strategies of the economic actors .

I .

I take an example to illustrate it is the zuukman taxation as it was presented by Éric Coochrel, zuukman taxation precisely by definition as it relies on the turnover generated in the different countries to establish the level of taxation so in fact it makes it possible to avoid a certain number phenomena which allow companies to evade tax so we have a certain number of mechanisms which exist and which allow us to avoid this type of phenomenon, .

I don't know if there are other ones, go ahead .

I beg you go ahead there is a question on the pmot and PE .

I think just now which was asked we did not answer uh we answered yesterday with uh with Boris valallo since we were invited by the mdeef uh we very clearly consider ourselves to move quickly uh that the concern we are going to say about companies listed on the stock exchange for example whose uh the the the value of their company very often depends on the value of div idends paid to shareholders is not the same as most business leaders in this country VSE SMEs that we rather side with those who produce wealth and who want above all to ensure that they have market share rather than having purchase orders including for the majority to have rather well paid employees if only so that he remains in the company the program that we put in place it is in favor of the employees in favor of all those who live from their labor force but if we look closely it is also in favor of C TPE PME on the one hand because we will depress domestic demand from the moment we put more money on salaries on pensions on the everything which basically rewards work and also because we are going to take measures in particular on ecological bification which will allow the state to be a keeper of order somewhere, that is to say to produce there too uh quite large amounts which will allow these companies also to respond when for example you do a lot more thermal renovation it's quite simple to understand that it can satisfy the building so by both means in reality we we are going to fill their order book and as the question has often been asked to us but it is not asked here how are we going to do for the few sectors which are smaller than they say in reality there is a study of 'an economist recently who is important who will perhaps have difficulty getting through the first months or even the first years from when there will be the increase in the minimum wage and wages indexed to inflation in relation to the price of work which can be too important while waiting for the multiplier effects our our policy to be put in place today there are 223 billion in aid of all kinds to businesses this is a figure from France strategy 2019 between exemption and direct aid and cetera tax credit we tell ourselves that we will have to gradually put this system back in place to help businesses that need it because they create jobs because they pay high salaries because 'they respect equal pay for men and women and so on and so on and that the money on the other hand that we will take from companies which do not need to be helped because in part they recycle it rather in div idends rather than in investment and in employment and well that will allow us to primarily help these sectors whether it is through free credit or through subsidies we will still see the mechanisms but from this point of view it will greatly help them to pass this milestone thank you yes I'm just going to say a word to you about tax loopholes harmful to the climate because it is indeed a subject first of all it is included in the 25 billion in economy that and therefore in revenue that we have displayed in the program but above all there are measures that we can take immediately for example on the air effectively with the TICP exemptions on kerosene on domestic flights where the VAT at reduced T on plane tickets is it can be immediate and it is necessary with regard to competition with the train since today the train is disadvantaged compared to air traffic but for all tax niches and harmful to the climate and in particular that which concerns professional sectors .

I am thinking of agricultural fishing for example and well we will have a progressive and concerted reduction for example we can refocus the exemptions on fishing on coastal fishing to the detriment of trawling and we we will also be in a logic of compensation for some because the important thing is to discourage the consumption of fossil energy and but not to destabilize the sectors so we have an approach that is both progressive and rational for this reduction of polluting tax loopholes. in a final round of questions ah yes sorry or it was on the fact that François hand had tried to align the taxation of capital with that of labor thank you and also on the barè I'm not sure that you answered with de liè hello William William Herbin from Bloomberg news just a question have you quantified the impact of the increase in the minimum wage uh on inflation hello Albon Christian for humanity uh in 1936 the accession to power of the Popular Front coupled with the historic strike movement led by the CGT allows for the first time workers in the country to benefit from paid leave so my question is the following would you have a large symbolic measure to submit to the French today concerning working time or paid leave thank you Thierry far from the challenge magazine .

I have a question about the method .

I expected extremely precise things on all your measurements a bit like did Valérie rabot in the echoes then will we have something precise then see .

I don't know the increase in aPL the increase in the salary of the point of civil servants how much how much do you evaluate it .

I thought that was what 'we were going to know today so perhaps we will know after the other point on withdrawals when .

I am surprised by the fact that you do not give the number your objective 60 years with the number of annuity Thomas pickett.

I which s who participated .

I believe in the program recently said it will be with 43 annuities so because it is quite fundamental to know if it is 40 43 to 45 even if .

I understand that it will be negotiated with the social partners is it that you can still give a direction and the other last point remark to Madame cager this because .

I am part of the challenge magazine which publishes this study of the 500 biggest fortunes indeed we have seen that it has completely exploded in recent years except that the ISF has not exploded because these people are professionals who hold professional fortunes so they are exempt from ISF since they do not tax the uh the work tool so is that means that you are going to tax the working tool in the ISF just .

I .

I notice your appetite for the smallest detail .

I point out that we are today the only political force to present to you a budget with estimated expenses year after year and with recipes explaining where we are going to get it so .

I hope that you will ask the same questions to the two other gatherings which arise whether it is the Macronist camp or the national gathering somewhere the Macronist camp moreover we have the Okay, it's the public finance programming law which absolutely everyone, including the High Commissioner for Public Finance, explains that it's absolutely not credible uh so if you want them from that point of view we are we are quite calm, that is to say that we without the services of Bery at our disposal with very little time uh since the dissolution dates back not even 2 weeks ago we have established a budget we will give you does not actually give all the details here but believe us we worked day and night to establish them and moreover, very sincerely, we did not start from scratch because it has been 2 years that in reality we continue to work together at the Assembly to be able to produce counter-budgets but to answer you yes we have uh in detail uh but without .

I heard earlier hlois Laurent who talk about credibility without uh the assurance that to the comma we are exactly the piages we have in detail what allows us today to give you these figures, that's the first thing and the second thing on uh the question uh .

I was going to say which refers to the question of deficits and in particular to figures which are announced to us to move quickly our logic is not to finance our program by an increase in deficits that is not the priority orientation at the same time we do not fix ourselves in the idea that the the the the mastrichian rates are something which completely constrains our proposals for example points out to you that what is put forward today by the government for next year uh all the economists the FCE calculated it .

I believe at 0.2% explains that when you reduce public spending in a year when you have a decline in economic activity in reality it is a recessive effect so be careful to follow exactly to the comma uh the uh the requirements from this point of view from Brussels but to be very clear with you both through tax revenues and indeed the multiplier effect on which we are counting and which we do not have out of a desire for credibility put in place in your program but which we know will feed us let's not finance it as a priority, .

I was going to say, we don't finance the program issue by increasing the deficit and from that point of view, I'll tell you one thing: .

I think we will do better than this current government because .

I remind you that if the deficits have increased since 2017 it is not because public spending has increased and here .

I am referring to François ECAL who is not really an illiberal economist but who before the commission of inquiry into the debt which is the late commission of inquiry then that it was suddenly stopped explained that indeed it confirmed that since 2017 the deficit has increased excluding covid expenditure which is to be put aside by the drop in revenue and from this point of view - here we say again like you as you saw .

I wanted to drive the point home on what ericocrel has just said very rightly you are very demanding of us and that is perfectly normal perfectly legitimate moreover a document will be sent to you transmitted which contains all the details and all the clarifications that you ask us .

I would still like to ins on this point we are indeed the only ones to have presented a program and a costing of this program the only ones and who do we face we have Macronists who, in the absence of having a project, have a balance sheet, this balance sheet, as we have said, is the ruin of the country and it is also lies, including on the budgetary forecasts which had been presented there there was also a flash mission from the Senate which was commissioned by the finance committee which was carried out by people from the right and the left, well especially from the right given that we are in the Senate and which proved on the basis of control on the spot and on the evidence that the government lied about the budgetary forecasts so .

I am willing that considerable credibility be given to people who literally lied about the budgetary forecasts but ultimately all of this still seems curious to me and we are faced with we, moreover, the extreme right the national gathering whose program changes every day al .

I would like someone to explain to us that their program is very credible also they change every day every day P they are in favor of the repeal of the reform pensions on odd days probably because Mr. Soot.

I spoke too much in the ear of Mr. Bardella they are against the odd days they are in favor of reducing VAT the removal of VAT on basic necessities on odd days they are against it so obviously it is difficult to quantify a program which changes every day for what concerns us we have a coherence we have a trajectory and .

I believe that it was presented clearly but once again the policy is not It's not absolute, it's comparative, so .

I 'm willing to look at what each and every person is doing in this campaign, but .

I believe that if there is indeed a bloc which, within the framework of this campaign, is serious and takes the voters for intelligent people, it's us and .

I believe that we have demonstrated it just responding to the challenge and and the taxation of the greatest fortunes because .

I was not clear enough earlier when .

I said that one of the faults which also explained the ease of the abolition of the ISF 2007 was the fact that its base was completely holed with the new ISF which will be reintroduced we will no longer have a base with holes, that is - say that all goods will be taxed which will also avoid and that answers other questions and concerns that there has been excessive tax optimization behavior here, that 's extremely important then anyway la la la the second thing compared to what Yan brusha has just said there is one thing that does not disappear from the national gathering program it is the fact that they want to eliminate the tax on real estate wealth and We still have to insist on that because there aren't many points in their program but they stick to this one even before starting to talk to Eric Cott.

I that it was also a bit in their DNA but that goes back a long way, 30 years ago Jean-Marie Le Pen wanted to abolish the income tax, well that would still be a bit of a task, so now they want to abolish the real estate wealth tax so in fact they want to go even further in a certain way than Emmanuel Macron in anti-redistribution policies in terms of social justice and in terms of fiscal justice they have very little revenue from this point of view to finance uh their spending program where and that's also what makes the coherence and that's a bit what etois said earlier there is there is there is going to be in the program which is presented today by the Nouveau Front Populaire of the revenues which are put in front of each expenditure and that is what gives it credibility and it is still quite important today to have this exchange exercise with you to precisely establish both credibility from the point of view of revenue and credibility from the point of view of expenditure exercises .

I think that we are delighted to do including the economists here but that we are not asked to do surprisingly enough nor at the national gathering nor in power in place just a word on the debt because there it is the trial which is always made to the left of economic non-seriousness .

I would still like to remind that if you go back a good thirty years it is each time under right-wing governments that the debt grows it is under wandering it is under Sarkozy it is under Macron and the accounts the public accounts on the contrary either deteriorate less or improve with the left so well well have that in mind because the logic behind the right-wing programs is a decline in the social state, the commodification of maximum economic activity, so we organize the reduction in revenues then we agitate the red rag of the debt saying the deficits are exploding the debt is exploding ah well we have to make savings and we are hitting social spending we had a magnificent example with Emmanuel Macron the pension reform the unemployment insurance reform are justified by that therefore in terms of seriousness .

I .

I believe that we should look at the reality of the situation and in terms of debt obviously the program of the Nouveau Front Populaire it has been said it has been repeated we can quibble about the point of the billion or if there are 2 billion in excess or 4 in less but that's not the question the question is what trajectory of victory how do we restore confidence how do we give people the power to live again how do we restore prospects to our businesses .

I would just like to answer the many questions that have not been asked on the question of ecology because .

I am very surprised that he does not have a question that concerns credibility which for me is perhaps the most important in the 21st century which is the ecological question that is to say that and in addition it is linked to the European issue .

I would just like to say that it is a program which at each stage at each moment raises the question of ecology absolutely at the center it is totally disingenuous and incredible to build an economic program without having as a priority the fact that the biosphere is collapsing in places it is absolutely fundamental to put that as an opportunity and as an element of structuring with ecological planning rather than as a scarecrow by explaining that it is a problem which will disrupt people's standard of living and .

I would simply like to make a link with the European elections which after all have just happened uh there is a The certainty that emerges from these elections is that the European Green Deal is for a long time uh the structuring act of the European project at least for the next 10 years and that probably the person who will be reappointed at the head of the European Commission and the person who presented the green pact in December 2019 a program which takes this climate and ecological issue seriously it is a program which is credible at the European level the programs which consider that they can ignore the climate question or the exploiting or instrumenting the social question against the environmental issue at the European level does not hold water so .

I think that this ecological question is not only important in itself given the context but also in the European context that is really something something that seems important to me thank you very much we will stop there they are at your disposal thank you for being Friday