David Lisnard: costing

Economic model claimed

Cut spending by at least €200bn (€80bn in the first year) before any cut in levies, then return €120bn to working people through lower contributions (« cotiser moins pour gagner plus » [“contribute less to earn more”]), €40bn to businesses in production taxes, €40bn to debt reduction.

Summary by the editors, without judgement, based on the candidate’s words quoted below. The site validates no economic model. Quotes checked on 15 October 2026.

« L’idée, c’est de rendre 60 % en pouvoir d’achat direct, c’est-à-dire cotiser moins pour gagner plus. »
Translation by the editorsThe idea is to return 60% as direct purchasing power, that is to say, contribute less to earn more.
BFMTV (compte rendu publié par Nouvelle Énergie), 8 September 2026. Words of David Lisnard.
« Sur 100 euros économisés, 60 reviennent à ceux qui travaillent, 20 baissent les impôts de production, 20 réduisent la dette ou modernisent l’État. C’est une règle simple, vérifiable, et qui engage : elle interdit que les économies servent à financer de nouvelles dépenses. »
Translation by the editorsOut of 100 euros saved, 60 go back to those who work, 20 lower production taxes, 20 reduce the debt or modernise the State. It is a simple, verifiable and binding rule: it prohibits savings from being used to fund new spending.
Nouvelle Énergie, FAQ du programme, « Que ferait David Lisnard des 200 milliards d’économies annoncés ? ».
« Toujours après la baisse de la dépense, jamais avant : David Lisnard refuse la baisse d’impôt financée par la dette. »
Translation by the editorsAlways after the cut in spending, never before: David Lisnard rejects tax cuts financed by debt.
Nouvelle Énergie, FAQ du programme, « David Lisnard veut-il baisser les impôts ? ».
« Si on veut qu’il y ait des locataires, il faut qu’il y ait des propriétaires. Si on veut qu’il y ait des salariés, il faut qu’il y ait des entreprises. Si on veut que l’on ait du revenu, il faut qu’il y ait de la production. »
Translation by the editorsIf we want there to be tenants, there must be landlords. If we want there to be employees, there must be businesses. If we want there to be income, there must be production.
BFMTV (compte rendu publié par Nouvelle Énergie), 8 September 2026. Words of David Lisnard.

Announced effects

Effects announced by the candidate, not checked by the editors. They are not added to any amount on the site.

About €400 net more per month per employee« Sur 200 milliards d’euros d’économies budgétaires, 120 milliards seraient rendus aux actifs en salaire net, soit environ 400 euros de plus par mois et par salarié, sans augmenter le coût du travail. »
Translation by the editorsOut of 200 billion euros of budget savings, 120 billion would be returned to working people as net pay, i.e. about 400 euros more per month per employee, without increasing labour costs.
Nouvelle Énergie, FAQ du programme, « Que propose David Lisnard pour le pouvoir d’achat ? ».400 € net per month per employee
More than 10% extra net pay« cent vingt milliards de gains de pouvoir d’achat, plus de dix pour cent de salaire net par mois »
Translation by the editorsone hundred and twenty billion in purchasing power gains, more than ten per cent of net pay per month
Cercle ETHIC, cité par Nouvelle Énergie, 30 June 2026. Words of David Lisnard.10 % of net pay
Higher potential growth« réduire structurellement la dépense publique, libérer l'investissement et la production et augmenter notre croissance potentielle »
Translation by the editorsstructurally reduce public spending, free up investment and production and increase our potential growth
Publication de David Lisnard, citée par Nouvelle Énergie, 11 September 2026. Words of David Lisnard.no amount
Wages, prices and employment through lower taxes on large companies« L’impôt qu’elles acquittent se répercute sur les salaires qu’il baisse, les prix qu’il augmente et l’emploi de tous les Français qu’il détruit. »
Translation by the editorsThe tax they pay is passed on to wages, which it lowers, to prices, which it raises, and to the jobs of all French people, which it destroys.
Tribune « Changer de logiciel fiscal », Atlantico (reprise sur unenouvelleenergie.fr), 16 April 2026. Words of David Lisnard.no amount
€40bn of debt reduction« Baisser la dépense, jamais augmenter l’impôt : 80 milliards d’euros dès la première année, au moins 200 milliards en trajectoire, dont 40 affectés au désendettement. »
Translation by the editorsCut spending, never raise taxes: 80 billion euros in the first year, at least 200 billion over the trajectory, 40 of which allocated to debt reduction.
Nouvelle Énergie, FAQ du programme, « Que propose David Lisnard face à la dette publique ? ».40 €bn

Effects on households

Annual difference in disposable income compared with current law, simulated measures of David Lisnard, in euros
Model household	Current lawdisposable income	David Lisnard *5 simulated measures
Single female employee on the SMIC	€20,492	+€3,045
Single mother, one child, half-time	€21,355	+€3,046
Couple, two children, average income	€47,724	+€7,329
Couple of managers, one child	€92,423	+€9,683
Single local government employee, category C	€24,859	+€129
Couple, two children, one primary school teacher	€50,117	+€9,602
Single pensioner, small pension	€15,194	€0
Well-off pensioner couple	€51,418	−€2,768

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.

New spending: €9.3bnfrom €8.7bn to €15bn
Revenue cuts: €137bnfrom €136bn to €141bn
New revenue: €0bn
Savings: €16bnfrom €15bn to €21bn
Spending announced by the candidate, not counted: €25bnthe candidate’s amounts, with no measure the cost schedule can cost; never added

No sum published. We only add up these totals if at least 60% of the costable essential levers carry a position of the candidate whose cost is known (costed, including by extrapolation, or status quo; a position costed only in part counts for half). Here: 6 out of 41 (15%: 9 levers of known cost, 6 of them costed in part). Below that, a sum would compare unrelated scopes from one candidate to another. The totals remain published: each one applies only to the positions it counts.

Annual order of magnitude, in billions of euros, over a full year, compared with current policies, with no behavioural effect; each line is in euros of the year of its source (shown on its page); a recalibration on a single price and GDP framework is planned. Each total is a positive amount; line by line, “+” is revenue or a saving for the public accounts, “−” spending or lower revenue. Under each total, the sum of the lower bounds and that of the upper bounds of the lines: the ranges are added bound by bound, which gives an order of magnitude, not a confidence interval.

Line by line

LeverPositionEffect on the public accounts, per year
Reductions in social contributions on low wages€120bn less in contributions, returned as net pay (about €400 a month)Assumption 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: +€400 net per month for each employee (« environ 400 euros de plus par mois et par salarié » [“about 400 euros more per month per employee”]), the same amount for all, through a cut in contributions, labour cost unchanged. Base: 20.96 million private-sector salaried jobs (Insee, second quarter of 2026), i.e. 400 × 12 × 20.957 million ≈ €100.6bn a year, against €120bn announced (which assumes about 25 million beneficiaries). Reading adopted: private-sector employees, same base and same method as the net pay increases of Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, Gabriel Attal and Bruno Retailleau; calculation excluding civil servants: public employees are not counted (about €29bn more if they were, 6.06 million public jobs). Amount targeted at the end of the savings trajectory (« au moins 200 milliards en trajectoire » [“at least 200 billion over the trajectory”], of which €80bn from the first year, split using the same 60% key): the year in which it would be reached is not given; the position is costed in full year. The contributions targeted are not detailed: at the SMIC, €400 exceeds employee contributions excluding CSG and CRDS (about €211 per month), so the measure implies also cutting employer contributions and raising gross pay accordingly; the static cost is the same. The decrease in the CSG (general social contribution) on earned income, announced elsewhere without a rate, may be part of it and is not counted twice. Gross cost, before the savings meant to finance it (the “Announced savings” lever, never added). The measures recorded so far on this lever (charges abolished at SMIC level for private individuals who employ staff, negative employer charges for hiring people who have been RSA (minimum income) recipients for more than two years, programme « Réussir une nouvelle ambition française ») are not costed separately.−€101bnrevenue cut
Corporate income taxNational corporate income tax at 20%, plus a local 0 to 5% share set by local authorities* Outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation (measured range: 25% only). Assumption by the editors. Partial costing. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Fipeco, L'impôt sur les sociétés: the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Central value brought down to the smallest amount: The note acknowledges that the amount shown is the top of the range opened by the local share of 0 to 5 points: overestimate, central value at the smallest amount of the coefficient. Only the national rate is costed (25% → 20%). The local share of 0 to 5 points, left to the choice of local authorities, is not counted: if all of them voted 5%, the total rate would remain 25% and the cost for general government as a whole would be almost zero. The amount shown assumes that no local share is voted: it is the top of this range. The same op-ed criticises the exceptional surcharge on large companies without saying what becomes of it: it is not costed.−€12bn^{* (outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation)}revenue cut, −€15bn to −€12bn
Pension indexationDe-index pensions above about €2,000 a monthAssumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Commission des comptes de la Sécurité sociale, Les comptes de la Sécurité sociale, résultats 2025, prévisions 2026 et 2027 (octobre 2026), fiche 2.5, tableau 1: the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Reading adopted: the « désindexation des retraites au-delà d'un seuil, de l'ordre de 2 000 euros mensuels » [“de-indexation of pensions above a threshold, of the order of 2,000 euros a month”] is read as a lasting rule from 1 January 2028: basic pensions above €2,000 per month are no longer uprated (nominal freeze), i.e. five missed upratings from 2028 to 2032 at the common inflation assumption of 1.75% a year, 8.75 cumulative points (7.5 to 10 points for inflation of 1.5% to 2.0%, i.e. about €9.5bn to €12.7bn net at the centre). Other reading: a freeze for a single year, about €2.2bn net. The threshold « de l'ordre de » [“of the order of”] €2,000 is taken as €2,000; a partial under-indexation, instead of a freeze, would yield less. Reading key: one point of uprating missed for one year by these pensions yields about €1.27bn net (1.1 to 1.6).+€11bnsaving, +€9.8bn to +€14bn
Inheritance and gift taxAbolish inheritance tax in the direct line; low rates elsewhereAssumption by the editors. Partial costing. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Cour des comptes, « Les droits de succession », septembre 2024, annexe n° 7 (page 92): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Abolition of inheritance tax in the direct line: 53% of inheritance tax revenue (share paid by children in 2018 according to the DG Trésor model, Cour des comptes 2024), i.e. €8.5bn to €9.6bn (editors' calculation). Not costed: gifts « massivement libéralisées sans délai de rappel fiscal » [“massively liberalised with no tax recall period”], with no amount, and the « à taux bas » [“low-rate”] tax maintained in the indirect line, with no rate.−€9bnrevenue cut, −€9.6bn to −€8.5bn
Teachers' pay+20% in five years, in return for reorganising the professionAssumption 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. Increase spread over five years and « conditionnée à une réorganisation profonde » [“conditional on a thorough reorganisation”] (greater autonomy, stronger presence in the school, mandatory continuing training, regular evaluation): this counterpart is not costed; the cost shown is gross.−€7.1bnnew spending, −€12bn to −€7.1bn
CSG (general social contribution)CSG on earned income lowered, CSG and CRDS deductible from income taxAssumption by the editors. Partial costing. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Commission des comptes de la sécurité sociale, octobre 2026, fiche 1.3, tableau 6: the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Reading: « CSG et CRDS deviendraient complètement déductibles de l'IR » [“CSG and CRDS would become fully deductible from income tax”] applies to all CSG and CRDS levied on income taxed under the scale, earned income and replacement income (2.4 non-deductible points of CSG and 0.5 point of CRDS); on earned income alone, about €4.4bn. Tax lost calculated by the editors at the 12.5% rate measured by the IPP on the deductible part of retirees' CSG. The cut in the CSG on earned income, with no rate or amount, is not costed; it may be part of the €120bn « rendus aux actifs » [“returned to working people”] of the contribution relief lever, whose composition is not detailed.−€5.6bnrevenue cut, −€5.8bn to −€5.5bn
Production taxesAbolish the C3S and, where appropriate, the CVAE (€11.5bn according to the party)−€5.2bnrevenue cut
Family quotientRemove the cap on the family quotient−€4.9bnrevenue cut, −€4.9bn to −€4.5bn
Legal retirement ageLegal retirement age raised to 65, ahead of a funded componentAssumption by the editors. Partial costing. Timetable not given: the source only says « impératif national urgent » [“urgent national imperative”], with no cohort or date. Costed at the most cautious option, 65 at the current pace beyond 64 (Cour des comptes (Court of Audit), cohorts born 1968 to 1972: €4.7bn in 2035); the accelerated increase (cohorts 1964 to 1968) would give €8.4bn. The Cour costs only the year between 64 and 65, in 2035 and not in 2032; the quarter between 63 years and 9 months (the law as it stands in 2032) and 64 is not counted.+€4.7bnsaving
Prisons and sentences20,000 prison places, sentences served in full, real life imprisonment* Outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation (measured range: 0 to 15,000 places). Assumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from AN, rapport spécial PLF 2026, Justice: the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Reading adopted: twenty thousand net places on top of the « 15 000 places » plan under way (his book already called for « 20 000 places de prison supplémentaires » [“20,000 additional prison places”], according to the site's page « Quel candidat propose de construire des places de prison ? »), delivered by 2032; neither a timetable nor a share of replacement places is given. Sentences served in full, whole-life imprisonment, and the programme's minimum sentences for repeat offenders and end of automatic sentence reductions (Sécurité page) are not costed separately: their cost goes through detention places, counted here.−€2.2bn^{* (outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation)}new spending, −€3bn to −€1.6bn
State medical aid (Aide médicale de l'État)Abolish the AME (state medical aid), replaced by emergency aid (€700m in savings)Assumption 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. +€0.4bnsaving, +€0.2bn to +€0.7bn
Right of asylumProcess asylum applications in consulates abroadAssumption 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, the same as for Bruno Retailleau (asylum examined outside the borders) and Nicolas Dupont-Aignan (application admitted only at the border): applications are processed in consulates abroad and are no longer lodged on French territory; material support for applicants (allowance and accommodation) is no longer due in France for the roughly 150,000 annual applications (151,665 in 2025, minus 1,677 applications at the border, Ofpra), at the average cost of an application. Not costed: the cost of processing in consulates, unknown, and shifts to emergency accommodation and State medical aid, which make the gain overestimated. Compliance with international and European law not assessed.+€0.2bnsaving, +€0.2bn to +€1.4bn
New nuclear reactorsSix EPRs, mini-reactors, fleet extended to 60 yearsPartial costing. Status quo for the first series of six EPRs, which is the PPE3 (multi-annual energy plan) programme (zero cost relative to current policies), like François Ruffin's six EPR2s. Not costed: small modular reactors, with no number or timetable (the cost schedule only costs EPR2s), and the extension of the existing fleet.€0bnzero cost

* Outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation. The proposed value lies outside the range the source measured; the amount extends its coefficient in a straight line and counts in the totals. 2 extrapolated lines:

Corporate income tax: 20%, measured range 25% only.
Prisons and sentences: 20,000 places, measured range 0 to 15,000 places.

Amounts announced by the candidate

The amounts that David Lisnard 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« réduire d’environ 25 milliards les charges pesant sur le travail » [“reduce the charges on labour by about 25 billion”] (op-ed of 28 May 2025)Position not costed. Quoted, not counted.−€25bnrevenue cut
Announced savings« 80 milliards d'euros dès la première année, pour au moins 200 milliards en trajectoire » [“80 billion euros from the first year, for at least 200 billion over the trajectory”] (same page, based on a video interview of 29 November 2025)Position not costed. Amount to be read in the quote.—direction to be read in the quote
Reductions in social contributions on low wages« 120 milliards seraient rendus aux actifs en salaire net » [“120 billion would be returned to workers in net pay”], out of « 200 milliards d’euros d’économies budgétaires » [“200 billion euros of budget savings”] (same page); the savings are not added into the overall totalOur calculation: −€101bn per year. No gap calculated: costing based on an assumption by the editors.−€120bncost to the public accounts
Production taxes« représenterait 11,5 milliards d’euros qui s’ajouteraient à la baisse de 10 milliards déjà prévue par le gouvernement » [“would represent 11.5 billion euros, on top of the 10 billion decrease already planned by the government”] (party's costing, predating the recent finance acts)Our calculation: −€5.2bn per year. No gap calculated: the announcement covers a different scope or a different year.−€12bncost to the public accounts
Funded share« La transition entre le système actuel et le nouveau se fera par tranches successives, soit environ 8 tranches, pour atteindre un montant de capitalisation évalué à 116 milliards d’euros, soit environ 40% du montant total des retraites. » [“The transition between the current system and the new one will take place in successive tranches, i.e. about 8 tranches, to reach a funded amount estimated at 116 billion euros, i.e. about 40% of the total amount of pensions.”]Position not costed. Amount to be read in the quote.—direction to be read in the quote
State medical aid (Aide médicale de l'État)« 700 millions d’euros d’économies » [“700 million euros in savings”]Our calculation: +€0.4bn per year. No gap calculated: costing based on an assumption by the editors.+€0.7bngain for the public accounts

What these amounts cover

12 costed positions out of 60 (20%); 9 essential levers costed out of 41

Costed positions: 12 out of 6020% of the positions recorded
Status quo, zero cost: 1current law maintained or zero amount, counted separately
Extrapolated, not added: 2, 0extrapolated: counted and marked *; not added: entirely covered by another position
On costable levers: 12 out of 4129%; the other levers are compared without being costed
Essential levers costed: 9 out of 41costable ★ levers of the grid with a known cost: costed (including in part, by extrapolation or not added) or status quo; 36 ★ addressed out of 57
Assumptions, partial costings: 10 assumptions, 6 partial costingsflagged line by line

Still not costed: 7 positions on revenue levers (taxes, levies) and 21 positions on spending levers, for lack of a sourced coefficient that applies to them without interpretation.
19 positions concern levers with no direct budgetary cost (institutions, rules, objectives).

Positions not costed

47 positions, each with its reason

47 positions. For each, the reason: lever with no coefficient in the cost schedule, or position that matches no measure costed without interpretation.

Income tax scaleNot costedCapital at a reduced rate, labour moderately progressive, tax expenditures repealedOverhaul of the income tax schedule without rates or thresholds, partly offset by the repeal of « un nombre substantiel de niches » [“a substantial number of tax expenditures”] that are not named: nothing to cost. Removing the cap on the family quotient is dealt with on its own lever. The same op-ed targets a net €100bn decrease in compulsory levies, « conditionnée à une réduction du périmètre de l'État, donc à une baisse massive de la dépense publique » [“conditional on a reduction in the scope of the State, and therefore on a massive decrease in public spending”].
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Not costedIFI and transfer duties replaced by property-based taxationAbolition of the IFI (real estate wealth tax) offset by property taxation without a rate: the net balance cannot be costed. Transfer duties fall under local taxation.
VATNot costedVAT at 12.5% and 20% (2025 op-ed); question « pas tranchée » [“not settled”] in programmeThe programme (« Réussir une nouvelle ambition française », read on 12 October 2026), more recent than the op-ed of 28 May 2025, does not settle the matter: « La question de la TVA « Compétitivité / Relocalisation » afin de baisser les charges sur les salaires reste posée. C’est un sujet qui n’a pas été tranché au sein des groupes de travail » [“The question of a ‘Competitiveness / Relocation’ VAT in order to lower charges on wages remains open. It is a subject that has not been settled within the working groups”]. Common rule: the candidate's most recent source prevails; the position is therefore not costed. The 2025 op-ed merged the reduced rates (10%, 5.5% and 2.1%) into a 12.5% rate and allocated the revenue to a decrease of about €25bn in charges on labour; the programme mentions VAT rising over twelve years towards a single rate, « par exemple de 25 % » [“for example of 25%”], with a decrease in charges on wages, without adopting it.
Access to higher educationLever that cannot be costedAbolish Parcoursup (health section of the programme)Lever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Social housingNot costedAbolish Article 55 of the SRU law; possibly a capped flow targetAbolition of the 20 to 25% social housing obligation, possibly replaced by a capped flow target: a planning rule, with no direct effect on the general government balance that can be costed.
Where doctors set up practiceLever that cannot be costedFreedom to choose practice location, contracting differentiated by needLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Carbon priceNot costedPolluter pays, with total levies unchangedPrinciple (polluter pays with constant levies, redistribution) without rate or base: nothing to cost.
Energy renovations per yearNot costedAbolish the DPE (energy performance certificate); no renovation target figureAbolition of the DPE (energy performance certificate): a rule with no direct budgetary cost, and no renovation target.
Wind and solarNot costedEnd of the special regime for renewables, shift towards nuclearReturn to ordinary law without saying whether it affects current contracts, and sums saved reinvested in nuclear power: balance not determined.
Electricity prices, European marketNot costedLong-term contracts at nuclear cost for industryTarget price: no budgetary cost as long as the gap with the market price is not compensated by the State; if it is, it becomes spending (benchmark: the 2022-2024 tariff shield, costed by the Cour des comptes).
PesticidesLever that cannot be costedReasoned use of plant protection products, new genomic techniques authorisedLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Floor prices, farm incomeLever that cannot be costedCharges shifted onto value added, environmental services paid forLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Common Agricultural PolicyLever that cannot be costedCAP refocused on production, sovereignty and exportsLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Status and autonomy of the territoriesLever that cannot be costedSame local freedoms everywhere, no negotiated special statusLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Additional public investment, per yearNot costedRoad, rail and digital plan against isolation, no amountInfrastructure plan with no amount: nothing to cost.
Industrial aid and reshoringNot costedThe State creates the conditions for reindustrialisation, without picking championsRole of the State defined without any spending measure: nothing to cost.
Voting system for legislative electionsLever that cannot be costedDoes not see full proportional representation as a remedyLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Citizens' initiative referendum (RIC)Not costedArticle 11 with no subject limits; workable popular initiative, guaranteed voteInstitutional reform, outside the budget: the number of votes is not set and their cost remains negligible on the scale of the public accounts (a national referendum costs €100m to €200m, Ministry of the Interior, 2025). Rule common to all candidates (decision of 18 October 2026).
Article 49.3 and revision of the ConstitutionLever that cannot be costedAble, eventually, to revise the Constitution by referendum; Article 49.3 not addressedLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Level of public spendingLever that cannot be costedPublic spending cut by 8 points of GDP in 10 years, below 50% of GDPLevel target (−8 points of GDP in ten years, below 50%): it is compared with the sum of the costed measures, not added to it.
Announced savingsNot costedSavings in State agencies and non-contributory allowancesOverall target (€80bn in the first year, at least €200bn over the trajectory) spread across items with no individual amount: it is compared with the sum of the costed measures, not added to it.
Handling of the debtLever that cannot be costedLower debt relative to GDP; rejects debt cancellationLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Fiscal rulesLever that cannot be costedGolden rule on the operating deficit, not on investmentLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Public aid to businessesNot costedOpposed to public aid to businesses; prefers to cut leviesOpposition in principle, with no measure or scope: nothing to cost.
Nurseries and childcareNot costedEarly learning for 1-6-year-olds entrusted to municipalitiesTransfer of early-learning provision for 1–6-year-olds to the communes, with no amount: a change of competence, no cost to estimate for general government as a whole.
Taxes on fuel and energyNot costedTemporarily suspend energy savings certificates (pump prices)Energy savings certificates are an obligation imposed on energy suppliers, financed through prices and not by the budget: no official costing read of the effect of their suspension on the general government balance.
Automatic payment, single social allowanceNot costedA single social allowance, capped at a percentage of the SMICSingle allowance capped at an unspecified percentage of the SMIC: the cost, or the saving, depends entirely on the parameters chosen.
Funded shareNot costedPay-as-you-go base, the rest funded (about 40% of pensions)Transition « par tranches successives, soit environ 8 tranches » [“in successive tranches, i.e. about 8 tranches”], with no timetable: the source does not say how many tranches would be switched before 2032 (none, one or several); not costed, same treatment as Éric Zemmour's « progressive » [“progressive”] funded pensions. The target, €116bn of pensions financed by funding (about 40% of pensions), is cited next to the total. Former costing: a single tranche by 2032, one eighth of the target, 2.34 points of pension contributions, about €14.5bn a year in transition cost (11.2 to 17.8).
Special pension schemes, points-based systemLever that cannot be costedA central public pension agency replaces all current bodiesLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Home ownershipLever that cannot be costedFunded retirement savings partly released for a main residenceLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Numbers and pay of civil servantsNot costed450,000 staff moved from offices to the field, lower pay billRedeployment of 450,000 staff and reduction of the wage bill, with no job cuts or amount specified. At the Saint-Raphaël rally (4 July 2026), the candidate added not replacing some of those leaving, « en commençant par les fonctions administratives » [“starting with administrative functions”], without giving the proportion: he proposes no longer replacing « l’ensemble des cinq cent mille départs annuels » [“all of the five hundred thousand annual departures”] (according to the site's page « Quel candidat veut réduire le nombre de fonctionnaires ? », updated on 3 October 2026). With no replacement rate or target headcount, nothing to cost.
Public hospitalsNot costedAbolish the ARS (regional health agencies); mayors to chair the boards of directorsAbolition of the ARS (regional health agencies) with their tasks transferred to prefects and elected officials: no costed net saving has been read.
Police and gendarmerie numbersNot costedSecurity forces in the field: 50% presence minimum, against 37%Redeployment of time spent on the ground, with no costed recruitment: the cost schedule costs additional staff, not a reorganisation. The « plan massif de remise à niveau de la police nationale » [“massive plan to upgrade the national police”] over ten years (programme, « Réussir une nouvelle ambition française ») has neither an amount nor staff numbers.
Juvenile justiceNot costedLower the age of criminal majority to 16 and reverse the minority excuse from 13Age of criminal majority at 16 and reversed excuse of minority: rules of law; their cost would go through additional detention places, which the text does not give.
Resources for the justice systemNot costedDouble staffing in the criminal courtsNo budget source read gives the staffing of the criminal courts: doubling it has no costed basis.
Labour immigration and residence permitsLever that cannot be costedResidence permits divided by eight, quotas for skilled labourLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Birthright citizenship and nationalityLever that cannot be costedEnd automatic acquisition of nationality by birthright (droit du sol)Lever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Place in the European UnionNot costedTreaty for the democratisation of Europe, competences redistributedNegotiation of a treaty on the division of competences, with no budgetary measure: nothing to cost.
Funding of private schoolsNot costedSchool catchment rules repealed, gradual education voucher for public or privateEqual public funding for public and private schools with no amount per pupil or scope (State, local authorities, investment): no official costing found. The programme calls it « neutre financièrement pour les budgets publics » [“financially neutral for public budgets”] (« Générer un renouveau civique »), without calculation. The abolition of school catchment rules is a rule for assigning pupils, with no direct budgetary cost.
School timetablesLever that cannot be costedSchool year and timetables subject to supervised local autonomyLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Free trade agreements (Mercosur)Lever that cannot be costedMandatory mirror clauses on imported agricultural productsLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
RailNot costedRoad and rail investment plan to open up isolated areasInvestment plan with no amount: nothing to cost.
Existing nuclear fleetLever that cannot be costedExtend the lifespan of reactors to 60 yearsLever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
End of lifeLever that cannot be costedAgainst a right to active assistance in dying, for the Claeys-Leonetti framework (2025)Lever with no coefficient in the cost schedule: the position is compared, not costed.
Flat-rate levy on capital (flat tax)Not costedPFU confirmed, property income under the same regime, capital taxed at a reduced rateProperty income subject to the flat tax (PFU) instead of the income tax schedule: the cost depends on the distribution of property income (€34.97bn of income declared under the actual-expenses regime and €8.48bn under the micro-foncier regime, 2024 income, DGFiP, breakdown of income by category) across marginal tax rates, which the DGFiP does not publish; no source read costs the measure (the CPO, in 2024, mentions it without costing it: increase in the marginal rate in the middle of the distribution, decrease in the top tenth). The rate of the « allégé » [“lighter”] flat rate is not given; the op-ed confirms the flat tax (PFU), denounces its rise from 30% to 31.4% without saying whether it goes back to 30%.
Minimum pensionNot costedUnconditional base pension from 65, minimum old-age income at €1,000/monthBase pension paid to all from age 65 with no amount, replacing the career-linked minimum contributory pension: nothing to cost. The minimum old-age income « à hauteur de 1000 euros par mois » [“at the level of 1000 euros per month”] is close to the current level of the ASPA (€12,523.14 a year for a single person, i.e. about €1,044 a month): neither an increase nor a decrease that can be costed. The same sentence bases the position on funded pensions, costed separately (not costed).
Adaptation to climate changeNot costedFires: more resources for the SDIS (fire and rescue services) by reallocating existing revenueReallocation of « une partie des recettes déjà prélevées » [“part of the revenue already collected”] to the SDIS (fire and rescue services) and local authorities, reinforced ground resources and water storage, with no amount: nothing to cost. The text finances these resources through redeployment, not through a new tax; the net balance for public finances is not stated.

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.

The rules and the full cost schedule, with its sources: the method.

David Lisnard’s programme: what we were able to cost