Fabien Roussel’s positions: 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 (3 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
• Numbers and pay of civil servantsCivil servants' index point raised by 30%, immediately* Outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation (measured range: 0% to 13%). Assumption 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. Candidate's figure (26 August 2026); the PCF press release of 18 September 2026 calls to « revaloriser immédiatement de 10% le point d’indice » [“immediately raise the index point by 10%”] (€15.3bn on the same cost schedule). The cost of one point (€1.53bn central, excluding employer contributions paid to other public administrations; €2.27bn, full employer cost, as upper bound; based on the 2022 and 2023 increases) is applied thirty times: beyond 13% (range of the cost schedule), linear extrapolation; this cost follows the index-based pay bill, but no source read puts a figure on an increase of this size. The « compensations » [“compensation”] to hospitals and local authorities shift the burden to the State without changing the total, counted across the three branches of the civil service. The costing of the SMIC at €1,700 net also counts the increase in low public-sector wages: the two amounts partly overlap (overlap declared in the cost schedule). Overlap with “Net monthly SMIC (minimum wage)”: the estimated common part (€2bn) is withheld from “Net monthly SMIC (minimum wage)”; this one is counted in full.−€46bn^{* (outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation)}new spending, −€68bn to −€44bn
• Legal retirement ageRetirement at 60* Outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation (measured range: 62 to 64 years). Assumption 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. Central value raised to the largest amount: cost acknowledged to be underestimated: below 62, linear extrapolation does not count the higher cost of each year of age (about €10bn per year of age from 60 to 62 according to the 2010 impact assessment, as per the cost schedule); upper bound of the coefficient: €9bn per year of age. Retirement at 60, costed at that value; below 62 (range measured by the sources), linear extrapolation, which underestimates the cost (about €10bn per year of age from 60 to 62 according to the 2010 impact assessment, as per the cost schedule). Contribution period assumption adopted: the quote does not call for a return to 40 years of contributions; the contribution period remains that of current law (172 quarters), and the period is not costed. Central value raised to the coefficient's upper bound, €9bn per year of age: calculation by the editors based on the Institut Montaigne (2022: €27bn gross gain in 2032 for the age raised from 62 to 65, divided by 3), the page not giving a per-year figure. External benchmark, not counted: the Institut Montaigne (2024 legislative elections, Nouveau Front populaire) costs at €58bn a year by 2027 (€49bn to €67bn) a package that adds to the return to 60 the 40 years of contributions and the full-rate age (€27bn, with the cancellation of the 2023 reform, €8.2bn), the minimum contributif at the SMIC (€13.9bn), validated years on RSA (€8.4bn) and the minimum old-age income (€0.7bn): €35.2bn for age and contribution period alone. Same treatment as François Ruffin's position.−€34bn^{* (outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation)}new spending, −€34bn to −€22bn
• Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Restore the ISF (wealth tax); Zucman tax (signed statement, October 2025)Assumption by the editors. Reading adopted: the quote, of 12 September 2026, concerns the wealth tax (ISF); the Zucman tax comes from a signed statement by Fabien Roussel of 16 October 2025, during the examination of the 2026 budget (pcf.fr, « Les communistes mobilisés pour arracher des victoires ! », https://www.pcf.fr/arrachons_des_victoires_2025): « faire gagner la baisse de la CSG, le retour de l’ISF, la taxe Zucman » [“win the cut in the CSG, the return of the ISF, the Zucman tax”]; it counts as a proposal of the scheme then being debated in Parliament, the 2% minimum tax on assets of more than €100m. The Zucman tax (2% minimum tax on assets of more than €100m) is costed at the upper range of estimates, €15bn to €25bn (about €20bn), that of its promoters (Gabriel Zucman, National Assembly report no. 930 and Senate report no. 689); the administration has not simulated it; estimates that take into account exile, tax optimisation or the deduction of corporate income tax are much lower (€2bn to €5bn).+€24bnnew revenue, +€18bn to +€30bn
• Energy renovations per yearUp to 900,000 whole-building energy renovations a year in 2032* Outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation (measured range: 91,374 homes only). Assumption by the editors. Partial costing. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Chiffres clés de l'Anah 2024 (DREAL Corse): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. The « rénovation thermique globale » [“comprehensive thermal renovation”] is read as a major renovation, at the pace targeted for 2032 (« jusqu'à 900 000 » [“up to 900,000”]): the amount is that of this pace, at the current average grant for major renovations. Not costed: the zero out-of-pocket cost promised to the lowest-income households, beyond the average grant. Buildings other than housing are not distinguished.−€21bn^{* (outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation)}new spending, −€29bn to −€9.7bn
• Rail€10bn more a year for railCandidate’s amount, taken as is. Candidate's amount, counted as additional public spending (€1 announced = €1). The text does not say what share would go through SNCF Réseau rather than the State budget, nor the split between network, rolling stock and freight. Free urban public transport, in the same sentence, falls under the “Everyday transport” lever.−€10bnnew spending
• VATVAT from 20% to 5.5% on electricity, gas and fuel (« urgence énergétique » [“energy emergency”])Assumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from DG Trésor, Trésor-Éco n° 371, « Analyse de la composition des recettes de TVA » (M. Gesta), septembre 2025, tableaux 1 et 2 (pages 4 et 5 du PDF): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Reading adopted: the decrease applies to the energy sources the candidate himself cites on 16 September 2026 (RMC and BFMTV): electricity, gas and motor fuels (« le prix à la pompe » [“the price at the pump”]), at the rate he gives, 5.5%. Domestic heating oil, not cited, is not costed. Costing based on the Institut Montaigne breakdown by product and the SDES 2022 energy balance (domestic heating oil removed from petroleum products). The reduced rate on motor fuels is not permitted by the VAT directive.−€9.1bnrevenue cut, −€11bn to −€9.1bn
• Defence budgetStop « surarmement » [“over-armament”]: funds to hospitals and schoolsAssumption by the editors. Coefficient 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. Reading adopted: rejecting the « 36 milliards d'euros pour le budget de la défense en plus » [“36 billion euros more for the defence budget”] (summer university, 26 August 2026) amounts to returning to the initial trajectory of the 2023 military programming law (€67.4bn of appropriations in 2030), instead of the trajectory updated in August 2026 (€75.7bn): €8.3bn less in 2030, i.e. about 0.24 points of GDP, maintained in 2032 (effort of 2.26% instead of 2.5%). A cut beyond that is not stated.+€8.8bnsaving, +€8.5bn to +€9.1bn
• New nuclear reactors20 EPR2s and 12 small modular reactors by 2050* Outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation (measured range: 0 to 6 reactors). Assumption by the editors. Partial costing. Coefficient calculated by the editors from EDF, communiqué du 18 décembre 2025, « EDF shares its forecasted cost estimate of the EPR2 programme for €72.8bn » (copie d'archive du 13 octobre 2026, le site renvoyant une erreur 403): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Central value brought down to the smallest amount: 2032 financing need acknowledged as overestimated beyond the six EPR2s of the PPE3, disbursed later than the coefficient assumes (2027 to 2038); lower bound: EDF's December 2025 estimate, 60% financed by a State loan paid out over 12 years (€0.61bn per reactor). Twenty EPR2 by 2050, i.e. fourteen more than the six of the PPE3. Beyond the six EPR2 of the PPE3, the cost schedule coefficient (disbursements spread from 2027 to 2038) is extrapolated linearly: it probably overestimates the 2032 financing need, as the subsequent reactors are disbursed later. State loan: weighs on the debt, shown separately from the balance. Not costed: the twelve small modular reactors, which the cost schedule does not cost.−€8.5bn^{* (outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation)}additional State lending, on the debt, −€17bn to −€8.5bn
• Minimum pensionNo pension below the SMIC « quand on a travaillé toute sa vie » [“when you have worked all your life”]* Outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation (measured range: 0 to 100 €/month). Assumption by the editors. Partial costing. Coefficient calculated by the editors from Cour des comptes, Situation financière et perspectives du système de retraites, note 14: the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Reading adopted, judging by the following sentence (« quand on a travaillé toute sa vie » [“when you have worked all your life”]): total pension for a full career raised at least to the current net SMIC (€1,477.93), starting from the target of the 2023 law (85% of the net SMIC, i.e. €1,256), hence +€222 a month of guaranteed minimum pension; beyond +€100 (range of the coefficient), linear extrapolation. The 85% target is an objective, not a guaranteed amount: the actual gap varies by career. Not costed: the SMIC at €1,700 net targeted in the same speech, which would raise this minimum further. Central value of the coefficient adopted: its upper bound, according to the cost schedule itself, overstates the cost (it assumes that all beneficiaries receive the full increase). External benchmark, not counted: the Institut Montaigne costs the increase of the contributory minimum pension (minimum contributif) to the level of a €1,600 net SMIC for full careers at €13.9bn a year by 2027 (increase of €286 a month applied to €7.7bn of minimum contributif spending; 2024 legislative elections, Nouveau Front populaire page on pensions).−€7.8bn^{* (outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation)}new spending, −€12bn to −€4bn
• Net monthly SMIC (minimum wage)SMIC raised to €1,700 net, 5% increase in all wages* Outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation (measured range: 1,477.93 to 1,691 €/month). Assumption by the editors. Partial costing. Coefficient calculated by the editors from legisocial, Montant du SMIC 2026: the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Candidate's amount (26 August 2026); the PCF press release of 18 September 2026 calls for « le smic à 2200 euros bruts » [“the SMIC at 2,200 euros gross”], i.e. about €1,740 net, not used here. Beyond €1,691 net (range measured by the sources), linear extrapolation. The 5% increase in all wages is not counted: for private-sector wages, it is a demand made to employers, with no direct public spending; for public employees, it is covered by the increase in the public sector pay index point recorded under the “civil service” lever. Of which €2bn not added, common base with “Numbers and pay of civil servants”. The lowest public sector salaries are raised by both measures. SMIC share: the increase in the public sector wage bill that it counts, 1.8 of the €2.5bn of the lower bound (expert group, 2019, table VI.1), nothing in the upper bound (Carbonnier, excluding the public sector wage bill), 0.9 of the €3.75bn of the central value, average of the two. Pay index point share: a ratio of bases, the same whatever the convention, provided both bases are counted in the same way. At full employer cost (upper bound for the point): the pay bill raised by an increase in the SMIC, €1.8bn for +6.95%, i.e. about €26bn, compared with the €227bn raised by a 1% increase in the point (€2.27bn, Senate), 11%. Excluding employer contributions (central value for the point, €1.53bn, i.e. a base of about €153bn), both bases are reduced in the same proportion (244.6 / 362.1, Cour des comptes): about €17.6bn out of 153, still 11%. Editors' calculations.−€6.3bn^{* (outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation)}revenue cut, −€11bn to −€1.6bn; €2bn more, costed, not added
• Extra-billing by doctorsEnd extra-billing by doctorsAssumption by the editors. Coefficient calculated by the editors from HCAAM, « Les dépassements d’honoraires des médecins : état des lieux », octobre 2025 (pages 4 et 22 du PDF): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Reading adopted, that of his words: the end of extra fees goes with the « remboursement à 100 % par la Sécurité sociale de tous les soins prescrits, sans reste à charge » [“100% reimbursement by the Sécurité sociale of all prescribed care, with no out-of-pocket cost”], hence with the coverage of the amounts by the national health insurance (Assurance maladie), €4.3bn to €6.6bn a year in 2032 (5.7 at the centre). Other reading: a ban on extra fees without coverage, at zero budgetary cost (option costed for Marine Tondelier, whose text caps extra fees without mentioning out-of-pocket costs). The 100% reimbursement of other care, targeted with no timetable (« aller vers » [“move towards”]), falls under other levers.−€5.7bnnew spending, −€6.6bn to −€4.3bn
• Unemployment, max. benefit durationRepeal the unemployment insurance reformsAssumption by the editors. Partial costing. Reading adopted: the repeal of the reforms includes the 2023 countercyclical modulation, which sets the maximum duration. The other reforms are not costed here: the 2019-2021 one is costed under the “Benefit amount and tapering” lever; the 2026 amendment on negotiated terminations (ruptures conventionnelles) is not.−€4.2bnnew spending, −€4.5bn to −€4.2bn
• Police and gendarmerie numbers60,000 police officers, investigators, customs officers and judges (€2.5bn)Assumption 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. 60,000 staff (police officers, investigators, customs officers, magistrates) with no breakdown: all counted under this lever, at the average cost of a police and gendarmerie post (€45.1k at the centre, full employer cost at the upper bound); a justice post costs a little more (about €50k in the cost schedule). The candidate puts the whole at €2.5bn of appropriations, without saying over what period: cited, not compared.−€2.7bnnew spending, −€4.5bn to −€2.6bn
• Benefit amount and taperingRepeal the unemployment insurance reforms (2019-2021 calculation)Assumption by the editors. Partial costing. Reading adopted, the same as for Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Marine Tondelier: the repeal of the unemployment insurance reforms applies to the whole 2019-2021 reform (eligibility, calculation, degressivity). The other reforms targeted are not costed here: the 2023 countercyclical modulation is costed under the “duration” lever; the 2026 amendment on negotiated terminations (ruptures conventionnelles) is not. Overlap with “Unemployment, max. benefit duration” examined: estimated common base zero, both amounts are added. The 2023 reform was costed on the law resulting from the 2019-2021 reform, and Unédic itself adds the two together (€2.2bn for 2019-2021, €4.5bn for 2023, €6.7bn together in steady state, February 2023, table A).−€2.3bnnew spending
• Medical deductiblesAbolish medical deductibles and flat-rate charges, aim for 100% social securityPartial costing. The cost schedule option matches the text, which names the medical deductibles (franchises) and flat-rate contributions. 100% reimbursement of all prescribed care, targeted without a timetable (« aller vers » [“move towards”]), is not costed: the grid has no lever for out-of-pocket costs other than deductibles. The end of extra fees (dépassements d'honoraires), in the following sentence, is recorded under its own lever.−€2.1bnrevenue cut, −€2.3bn to −€2.1bn
• Social housingSRU quota raised to 30% in urban areas, 200,000 social homes a yearAssumption by the editors. Partial costing. Coefficient calculated by the editors from AN, rapport spécial PLF 2026, Logement et hébergement d'urgence (F. Jolivet): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors. Only the 200,000 social housing units a year are costed; the SRU quota raised to 30% is a planning rule, with no direct costed effect. The same source calls for « rétablie une aide à la pierre ambitieuse et pérenne » [“an ambitious and lasting construction subsidy to be restored”]; the PCF puts it at « 15 milliards d’euros annuels » [“15 billion euros a year”] (statement of 22 September 2026, source of the position on rents), an amount cited without being included: it does not cover the same scope as the unit cost in the cost schedule.−€1.6bnnew spending, −€1.7bn to −€1.4bn
• Inheritance and gift taxInheritance: increase on the largest, exemption below €200,000* Outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation (measured range: €100,000 to €159,325). Assumption by the editors. Partial costing. Coefficient calculated by the editors 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. Central value brought down to the smallest amount: cost acknowledged as overestimated: the costed reading (allowance of €200,000 per heir) is the most costly and the increase on the largest inheritances, a source of revenue, is not counted; the coefficient has only one value, lower bound included: amount unchanged. Reading: « nous exonérerons les héritages en dessous de 200 000 € » [“we will exempt inheritances below €200,000”] is read as an allowance of €200,000 per heir in the direct line on estates (instead of €100,000), extrapolated beyond the measured range (€1.5bn). Other reading, a threshold (only inheritances below €200,000 exempt, the others taxed from the first euro): lower cost, not costed for want of a published distribution. Not costed: the exemption of heirs outside the direct line and the increase on the « héritages les plus riches » [“richest inheritances”], with no threshold or rate. Only the cost of the allowance is costed: the part on the « héritages les plus riches » [“richest inheritances”], which would bring in revenue, is not, which overstates the net cost of the position. The costed reading (an allowance for each heir) is also the most costly; the one most faithful to the words (« les héritages en dessous de 200 000 € » [“inheritances below €200,000”] exempt, a threshold) would cost less, but no published distribution of the shares received per heir makes it possible to cost it: the amount shown is an upper bound.−€1.5bn^{* (outside the range measured by the source: linear extrapolation)}revenue cut
• Violence against women and childrenComprehensive law on sexual violence « et surtout les 3 milliards » [“and above all the 3 billion”]Assumption by the editors. Partial costing. Candidate’s amount, taken as is. The candidate calls for the comprehensive law « et surtout les 3 milliards d'euros qui vont avec » [“and above all the 3 billion euros that go with it”], without saying “a year” or “additional”. Article 68 of the comprehensive law (loi intégrale) passed at first reading by the National Assembly (13 October 2026) programmes €3,000m of appropriations a year from 2027 to 2032: a total amount of appropriations, whereas existing spending on sexual and gender-based violence is €1.5bn according to the Government (€1bn from the State, €0.5bn from social security, sitting of 9 October 2026). Most cautious reading, the same for all: €3bn read as the total, i.e. €1.5bn a year more than current appropriations (partial costing). Read as a supplement, they would be worth €3bn; the Government estimates the cost of the law's measures, in the long run, at between €3bn and €4bn on top of existing spending.−€1.5bnnew spending
• Everyday transportFree public transport in the metropolitan areasAssumption by the editors. Partial costing. Reading adopted: free transport « dans les métropoles » [“in the metropolitan areas”] outside Paris is costed by the lost fare revenue of the 28 networks outside Paris with a metro or tramway (€1.25bn in 2019, Cour des comptes), the best approximation found of the networks of the 21 metropolitan areas outside Paris: it counts a few conurbations that are not metropolitan areas and leaves out metropolitan areas with neither metro nor tramway. Not costed (partial costing): the Métropole du Grand Paris, whose network, that of Île-de-France Mobilités, covers the whole region and cannot be split in the sources read (free transport across all of Île-de-France: €3.6bn in the cost schedule). On 8 April 2026, the candidate called for « la gratuité des transports publics urbains » [“free urban public transport”] with no scope; the June wording, more recent, limits it to the metropolitan areas.−€1.3bnnew spending
• Family allowancesReturn to a universal family policyAssumption by the editors. The « retour » [“return”] to a universal family policy is read as the end of the income-based modulation of family allowances (2015).−€1bnnew spending, −€1bn to −€0.8bn
• Pension indexationPensions indexed to inflation (against the 2027 budget freeze)Assumption by the editors. Basic pensions are already uprated each year in line with inflation (Social Security Code, Art. L. 161-25): the position amounts to maintaining this rule against the freeze envisaged for 2027.€0bnzero cost

Overlaps

Amounts announced by the candidate

The amounts that Fabien Roussel 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
• Additional public investment, per year« emprunter 500 milliards d'euros sur cinq ans » [“borrow 500 billion euros over five years”], mobilised by the public banking hub (CDC, Bpifrance); « un fonds d'avenir doté de 500 milliards d'euros » [“a future fund endowed with 500 billion euros”] (closing speech of the 40th congress, 5 July 2026)Position not costed. Amount to be read in the quote.—direction to be read in the quote
• Police and gendarmerie numbers« 2,5 milliards d’euros de crédits pour embaucher ces 60.000 agents, les former » [“2.5 billion euros of appropriations to hire these 60,000 staff, train them”]; « C’est 2,5 milliards que nous voulons, et dès maintenant » [“It is 2.5 billion that we want, and right now”]Our calculation: −€2.7bn per year. Amount to be read in the quote.—direction to be read in the quote
• Rail« un investissement supplémentaire de 10 milliards d’euros par an dans le ferroviaire » [“an additional investment of 10 billion euros a year in rail”]Our calculation: −€10bn per year. Candidate’s amount, taken as is.−€10bncost to the public accounts
• Violence against women and childrenPCF summer university, 26 August 2026: « Nous voulons une loi intégrale et surtout les 3 milliards d'euros qui vont avec. » [“We want a comprehensive law and above all the 3 billion euros that go with it.”]Our calculation: −€1.5bn per year. Candidate’s amount, taken as is.−€3bncost to the public accounts

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.