Nicolas Dupont-Aignan’s programme: what we were able to cost

Effects on households

Eight model households, annual disposable income, calculated with OpenFisca-France for only the measures the engine can simulate (5 measures). A zero difference means that these measures do not affect this household, not that the programme changes nothing for it. *: at least one simulated measure rests on a reading by the editors. The detail, household by household, and the comparison with the other candidates.

The public accounts

How to read these amounts. These are static costs and revenues, with no feedback effect, over a full year: nothing on growth, employment or the revenue that economic activity would gain or lose. A higher net cost does not on its own make a worse policy, nor net savings a better one: each programme rests on an economic model (demand-led stimulus, lower compulsory levies, consolidation of the public accounts…) that the cost schedule does not settle. GDP itself measures a volume of activity, not well-being or the usefulness of what is produced. Economic models and feedback effects.

Line by line

• LeverPositionEffect on the public accounts, per year
• Reductions in social contributions on low wagesCut in employee contributions up to 3 SMIC: +8% net payAssumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Groupe d'experts SMIC, Rapport 2025 (25 novembre 2025): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Per-person rule: net wage × 1.08 for every private-sector employee paid up to 3 times the SMIC (minimum wage), through lower employee contributions, with gross wage and employer cost unchanged; nothing above 3 times the SMIC (the text provides for no gradual phase-out, which would change the cost little). Base: private-sector net wage bill up to 3 times the SMIC, €374bn to €396bn in 2024 (editors' calculation, from the reductions by wage band of the expert group on the SMIC and the net/gross ratios of Insee and Urssaf). Reading adopted: « tous les salariés » [“all employees”] of the private sector (« sans peser sur le coût du travail pour les entreprises » [“without weighing on labour costs for businesses”]); calculation excluding civil servants: public employees up to 3 times the SMIC are not counted (about €15bn more if they were). Same base and same method as the net wage increases of Gabriel Attal, David Lisnard and Bruno Retailleau. Static: the additional income tax is not counted.−€31bnrevenue cut, −€32bn to −€30bn
• Place in the European UnionReferendum on EU membership, exit if the people accept itAssumption by the editors. Partial costing. Reading adopted: the announcement of 11 October 2026 (Europe 1, « Le Grand Rendez-vous »), « dégager la moitié de la contribution à l'Union Européenne » [“free up half of the contribution to the European Union”] to finance the capital of €10,000 per newborn, read as the French contribution (levy on revenue) cut by half, the cut being assumed to be obtained, the same reading as for Marine Le Pen and Éric Zemmour: half of the levy voted for 2026 (€28.44bn, Finance Act for 2026), i.e. a gain of €14.22bn. The means (negotiation or unilateral decision) is not stated and is not assessed; EU returns assumed unchanged. Leaving the EU, subject to a referendum (quote in the position), is not costed: conditional commitment.+€14bnsaving
• Numbers and pay of civil servantsRe-index civil servants’ pay to inflationAssumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Sénat, « L'essentiel » sur le PLF 2026, programme « Fonction publique » de la mission « Transformation et fonctions publiques » (page 2): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Reading adopted: the value of the public sector pay index point uprated each year by inflation, starting from a point frozen under current policies. Common editors' assumption for all indexation rules: inflation of 1.75% a year (1.5 to 2.0%), five upratings from 2028 to 2032, i.e. a cumulative increase of 9.1% in 2032. Reading key: a one-point gap for one year costs €1.53bn (1.47 to 2.27). The reindexation of retirement pensions, in the same sentence, falls under the pensions lever.−€14bnnew spending, −€24bn to −€11bn
• Research, share of GDPResearch raised to 3% of GDP by 2029Assumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from SIES, notes sur la DIRD 2023 (Flash juillet 2025, NI novembre 2025): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Target of 3% of GDP for all research from 2029, with no public share stated: read, as for all candidates, according to the Barcelona target, under which two thirds of the increase come from the private sector. One third of the increase from 2.18% (2023) to 3% is public: +0.27 points of GDP of public research spending, about €9.5bn in 2032. Business R&D is not public spending.−€9.5bnnew spending, −€10bn to −€7.6bn
• Legal retirement ageLegal age kept at 62 years and 9 months, no resumption of the increaseAssumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from COR, Rapport annuel juin 2026, Synthèse: the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. « Rester » [“stay”] at 62 years and 9 months: current law resumes the increase towards 64 in 2028; the cost schedule counts the gap with 63 years and 9 months, the 2032 value.−€7.3bnnew spending, −€9bn to −€5.8bn
• Funded share€10,000 per newborn, locked until retirement in a public fundAssumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Céreq Bref n° 487-488, « S'insérer dans un monde instable : le diplôme reste une valeur sûre » (enquête 2024 auprès de la Génération 2021): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Central value brought down to the smallest amount: amount acknowledged to be an overestimate, since all births in France are counted and not only French newborns; the cost schedule coefficient has only one value (number of births times the amount), lower bound included: amount unchanged. Calculated on all births in France (Insee): the text targets French newborns, fewer in a proportion not sourced here. The amount is therefore an upper bound. Counted as spending; capital managed by a public fund could be a financial transaction (debt), as for Gabriel Attal's position. On 11 October 2026 (Europe 1), the candidate repeated the measure (« un livret épargne capitalisation avec 10.000 euros » [“a capitalisation savings account with 10,000 euros”], « intouchable » [“untouchable”] until age 60) and said he would finance it by freeing up « la moitié de la contribution à l'Union Européenne » [“half of the contribution to the European Union”]: resource costed under the “Place in the European Union” lever (€14.22bn), not deducted here.−€6.4bnnew spending
• Teachers' pay+15% net pay for teachers in 4 yearsAssumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Sénat, rapport spécial PLF 2026, Enseignement scolaire: the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Overlap with “Numbers and pay of civil servants” examined: estimated common base zero, both amounts are added. No source says that an announced increase in teachers' pay is counted net of the general indexation of the public sector pay index point: by default, the common base is zero and the two amounts are added together (the teachers' increase comes on top of indexation).−€5.4bnnew spending, −€8.9bn to −€5.4bn
• Resources for the justice systemEmergency plan for judges and clerks; aims for a €15bn budget (10.1 today)Assumption by the editors. Candidate’s amount, taken as is. Reading adopted: the « budget de la justice » [“justice budget”] is the Justice mission excluding the CAS Pensions (pensions special allocation account) (€10.63bn in the 2026 PLF; the text starts from €10.1bn). Target level with no deadline, costed at full build-up.−€4.4bnnew spending
• VATNo more VAT on the fuel tax (€6bn) or on 50 basic necessitiesAssumption by the editors. Partial costing. Coefficient calculated by the editors from PLF 2027, Évaluation des voies et moyens, tome I, accises sur les carburants (pages 34 et 35): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Only the end of VAT on the excise duty on motor fuels is costed: 20% of the excise duty paid by households (63.5% of the road fuel excise duty), as businesses can recover VAT; €3.8bn to €4.0bn. The candidate counts €6bn, the VAT on all litres, businesses included. The list of 50 basic necessities is not given: not costed. Compliance with EU law not assessed (the VAT directive requires excise duties to be included in the VAT base, according to the Government's answer published on 3 March 2020).−€4bnrevenue cut, −€4bn to −€3.8bn
• Industrial aid and reshoring€4bn reshoring fund for factories in rural areasAssumption by the editors. Candidate’s amount, taken as is. Reading adopted: the €4bn fund on this page is the fund « doté de 4 milliards d’euros par an » [“endowed with €4 billion a year”] on the Économie page, counted as aid each year. The same Économie page elsewhere announces a « Label Tricolore » fund of €5bn a year, not added here; it also provides for the fund to become self-financing in time: if it takes equity stakes rather than subsidising, part of it would be a financial transaction (debt), not part of the balance.−€4bnnew spending
• Family quotientFamily quotient cap raised to €3,000 per half-share* Outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation (measured range: €1,807 to €2,500). Assumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Conseil des prélèvements obligatoires, « Conforter l'égalité des citoyens devant l'imposition des revenus », octobre 2024: the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Cap on the benefit raised from €1,807 to €3,000 per half-share; beyond €2,500 (range measured by the Conseil des prélèvements obligatoires), linear extrapolation. Same scale as the complete removal of the cap costed by the Cour des comptes (€4.5bn to €4.9bn), which the extrapolation does not exceed (€3.3bn at the centre).−€3.3bn^{* (outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation)}revenue cut, −€3.9bn to −€3.3bn
• Profit sharing (participation, intéressement)Corporate tax cut by employee share ownership, profit-sharing free of forfait socialAssumption by the editors. Partial costing. Coefficient calculated by the editors from PLFSS 2026, annexe 4, tableau 9, Coût total des exemptions d'assiette, et de Legifiscal, Forfait social et fiscalité de la participation (mis à jour le 9 février 2024): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Only the exemption of profit-sharing (participation) from the forfait social is costed: 20% × €12.1bn of participation (exempt base forecast for 2026, PLFSS (social security financing bill) 2026, annex 4), i.e. €2.42bn, a ceiling that overstates the cost (participation paid by companies with fewer than 50 employees, already exempt, is not isolated); the candidate puts it at €1bn. Not costed: the cut in corporate income tax (IS) of one point per 2% of additional employee share ownership (10 points at most), with no static effect if behaviour is unchanged, whose cost depends on the spread of share ownership.−€2.4bnrevenue cut
• Nurseries and childcareNational plan for 100,000 nursery places in 5 years* Outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation (measured range: 0 to 70,000 places). Assumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from DREES, Minima sociaux 2024, fiche 34, tableau 4: the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. 100,000 nursery places in five years, at the Cour des comptes (Court of Audit) cost per place; beyond 70,000 places (measured range), linear extrapolation.−€2bn^{* (outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation)}new spending
• Inheritance and gift taxNo inheritance tax on the main residence or 100 ha of farmland; Dutreil at 90%Assumption by the editors. Partial costing. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Conseil des prélèvements obligatoires, « Corriger les principales distorsions de l'imposition du patrimoine », décembre 2025 (page 209 imprimée) and from Projet de loi de finances rectificative pour 2012 (Assemblée nationale, n° 71), évaluations préalables, article 4 (pages 172 et 173 du PDF): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Dutreil exemption raised from 75 to 90% (€0.78bn to €1.0bn, extrapolation beyond the range measured by the CPO (Council for Compulsory Levies)) and, under the reading adopted of « doubler les plafonds d'exonération des donations » [“double the exemption ceilings for gifts”], allowance on gifts in the direct line raised from €100,000 to €200,000 (€0.7bn, extrapolation). Not costed: the exemption of the main residence, for want of a published source on its share in the assets of taxed estates (property accounts for half of inherited wealth according to the DG Trésor model, without singling out the main residence), and that of the first 100 hectares of farmland, whose transferred value is not published.−€1.5bnrevenue cut, −€1.7bn to −€1.5bn
• Family allowancesFamily allowances increased, indexed to inflation and universalPartial costing. Only the restoration of universality (end of means-based adjustment) is costed. The immediate increase has no amount; indexation to inflation already exists (uprating every 1 April).−€1bnnew spending, −€1bn to −€0.8bn
• Tax and social security expendituresRestore a Pinel-type tax advantage for new housingAssumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from IGF et CGEDD, Évaluation du dispositif d'aide fiscale à l'investissement locatif Pinel, novembre 2019 (page 22 du PDF): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Reading: « un avantage fiscal type Pinel » [“a Pinel-type tax advantage”] is read as the last Pinel scheme, restored at the start of the term. Cost in 2032 of four to five generations of investments, at €0.24bn per generation per year (IGF-CGEDD (finance and environment inspectorates), 2019: 60,000 dwellings a year, €200,000 on average); lower bound at the reduced rates of 2024: €0.6bn to €1.2bn. The volume of investments under a restored scheme is not known.−€1bnrevenue cut, −€1.2bn to −€0.6bn
• Police and gendarmerie numbers10,000 additional police officers and gendarmes, net, in 5 yearsAssumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from AN, rapport spécial PLF 2026, Sécurités: the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. −€0.5bnnew spending, −€0.8bn to −€0.4bn
• State medical aid (Aide médicale de l'État)Abolish AME, one emergency clinic per départementAssumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Sénat, commission des affaires sociales, L'Essentiel PLF 2026 « Santé » (avis Florence Lassarade): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Reading adopted, the same as for David Lisnard and Bruno Retailleau: AME is abolished and replaced by coverage of urgent care only (« aide médicale d'urgence » [“emergency medical aid”] option), here one emergency clinic per département; the specific cost of these clinics has no source.+€0.4bnsaving, +€0.2bn to +€0.7bn
• Right of asylumAsylum requested only at the borders, never granted on the territoryAssumption by the editors. Partial costing. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Sénat, commission des finances, note de présentation PLF 2026, mission « Immigration, asile et intégration »: the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Central value brought down to the smallest amount: gain acknowledged as overestimated: shifts to ordinary emergency accommodation and State medical aid are not deducted; the central value is the lower bound of the cost per application (rule common to positions costed through the gain per asylum application). Reading adopted: applications made on French territory are no longer registered; only applications at the border remain (1,677 in 2025, Ofpra). Fewer applications: 151,665 − 1,677 ≈ 150,000 a year, at the average cost of an application (material support for applicants). Static: people who stayed in France without being registered would shift to mainstream emergency accommodation and State medical aid (aide médicale de l'État), costs not counted: the gain is therefore overestimated. Compliance with international and European law not assessed.+€0.2bnsaving, +€0.2bn to +€1.4bn
• Support for UkraineEnd aid to Ukraine (€7bn/year, he says, including the EU share)Assumption by the editors. Partial costing. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Ministère des Armées, Rapport au Parlement 2025 sur les exportations d'armement de la France (page 11 du PDF): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Only bilateral aid is costed; the French share of European aid, included in the €7bn announced, does not depend on a national decision.+€0.2bnsaving, €0bn to +€2.3bn
• Personal housing benefits (APL)Keep APL and index it to inflation, restore APL for home buyersAssumption by the editors. Partial costing. The Senate figure (2019) is the cost of one generation of home buyers, read here as an annual cost. Maintaining and indexing APL corresponds to current law, apart from the 2026 freeze, whose saving (€108m) covers only one quarter.−€0.05bnnew spending
• Pension indexationRe-index pensions to inflationAssumption by the editors. Basic pensions are already uprated each year in line with inflation (current law, Art. L. 161-25 of the Social Security Code): the position amounts to keeping this rule. Supplementary pensions, set by the social partners, are outside this costing.€0bnzero cost
• Survivors' pensionsSurvivor’s pensions kept in full€0bnzero cost
• University tuition feesFree higher education reaffirmed, rise in ancillary fees haltedAssumption by the editors. Partial costing. Reading adopted: « réaffirmer le principe d'un accès gratuit » [“reaffirm the principle of free access”] keeps the current national fees (€178 for a bachelor's degree, €254 for a master's), without abolishing them. Other reading: abolition of registration fees (« gratuité » [“free tuition”] option, €0.45bn to €0.55bn), which the text does not state. Not costed: halting the rise in ancillary fees, with no amount.€0bnzero cost
• Defence budgetDefence budget raised to 2.5% of GDPCoefficient calculated by the editors from Légifrance, loi n° 2026-791 du 16 août 2026 actualisant la programmation militaire pour les années 2024 à 2030: the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. 2.5% of GDP is already the floor of the military programming law for 2030: zero cost relative to this reference law.€0bnzero cost

Amounts announced by the candidate

The amounts that Nicolas Dupont-Aignan puts forward, with the direction given to them (“+”: gain for the public accounts, “−”: cost). They are never added to the totals or to each other. The gap with our calculation is only given when both cover the same scope: not for a position that is not costed, costed in part, based on an assumption by the editors, or whose amount is the candidate’s own, taken as is; and only when the announcement falls outside the range of our calculation (otherwise: “within the range”).

• LeverWhat the candidate saysAnnounced, per year
• VAT« suppression de la TVA sur la taxe (6 milliards d’euros de coût) » [“abolition of VAT on the tax (€6 billion cost)”]; the VAT abolished on 50 products has no amountOur calculation: −€4bn per year. No gap calculated: the announcement covers a different scope or a different year.−€6bncost to the public accounts
• Industrial aid and reshoringÉconomie page (10 Oct. 2026): « un grand fonds d’investissement et de relocalisation doté de 4 milliards d’euros par an » [“a large investment and reshoring fund endowed with €4 billion a year”], which « devra, à terme, s’autofinancer via les profits retirés de ces investissements » [“will, in time, have to be self-financing through the profits drawn from these investments”]Our calculation: −€4bn per year. Candidate’s amount, taken as is.−€4bncost to the public accounts
• Profit sharing (participation, intéressement)« coût : 1 milliard d’euros » [“cost: €1 billion”]Our calculation: −€2.4bn per year. No gap calculated: costing based on an assumption by the editors.−€1bncost to the public accounts
• Funded share« Cette mesure coûtera environ 6 milliards d’euros par an à l’État. » [“This measure will cost the State about €6 billion a year.”]Our calculation: −€6.4bn per year. No gap calculated: costing based on an assumption by the editors.−€6bncost to the public accounts
• Corporate income tax« recettes supplémentaires de 10 milliards d’euros au bout de 5 ans » [“additional revenue of €10 billion after 5 years”] (taxation of multinationals); the IS cut on reinvested profits has no amountPosition not costed. Quoted, not counted.+€10bngain for the public accounts
• Tax and social security fraud« pour économiser 20 milliards d’euros » [“in order to save €20 billion”] (social security checks) and « avec un objectif de 20 milliards d’euros » [“with a target of €20 billion”] (tax fraud), with no timetablePosition not costed. Quoted, not counted.+€40bngain for the public accounts
• Level of public spending« il est possible d’économiser 30 milliards en 5 ans » [“it is possible to save 30 billion in 5 years”]Position not costed. Amount to be read in the quote.—direction to be read in the quote
• Announced savings« des économies de 130 milliards d’euros » [“savings of €130 billion”] after five yearsPosition not costed. Amount to be read in the quote.—direction to be read in the quote

What this costing does not measure

• Growth and employmentThe effect of the measures on activity and employment, and the revenue gained or lost as a result; it depends on the economic model used: models and feedback effects.
• Education, health, researchLong-term effects on human capital, productivity and innovation.
• InequalityThe distribution of gains and losses across the whole population, beyond the eight model households.
• Public servicesWhat new spending or savings change in the quality of the services provided and in access to them.
• Environment and climateEffects on emissions, natural resources and adaptation to climate change.
• Sovereignty and external dependenceEffects on the country’s dependence on other countries: energy, industry, defence, supplies.
• Interest rates on the debtThe effect of a programme on the terms on which the State borrows, which also depend on the make-up of the holders of its debt.