Errata

824 corrections

21 October 2026

14 corrections · Raphaël Glucksmann (14)

Raphaël Glucksmann 14 corrections

Profit sharing (participation, intéressement)Costing revised: the only source is the Projet socialiste, a Parti socialiste text adopted before the candidate was designated; neither his statements nor the texts of Place publique, the party he co-chairs, take it up (check of 21 October 2026). A party's position is not that of its candidate: position cited, not costed, as the reason says (it was already not costed).Version 3
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsSource revised: the only source remains the Projet socialiste, a Parti socialiste text adopted before the candidate was designated; neither his statements nor the texts of Place publique, the party he co-chairs, take it up (check of 21 October 2026). A party's position is not that of its candidate: it remains a measure of the candidate's associates, shown separately, never added; the note says so. Amount unchanged.Version 5
Nurseries and childcareSource revised: position taken from the text of Place publique, the candidate's party (« Acte un », 2025, p. 78), instead of the Projet socialiste, a text from another party that no statement by the candidate takes up (check of 21 October 2026; decision of 19 October 2026: documents from the candidate's own party count as his positions). Summary and quote replaced. The Place publique text gives neither a number of places nor an amount: position not costed, like the guarantee of a childcare place for Marine Tondelier; the associates' measure costed on the Projet socialiste's 200,000 places (shown separately, never added) leaves the page. Quote to be checked by the editors.Version 5
Tax and social security expendituresSource revised: position taken from the text of Place publique, the candidate's party (« Acte un », 2025, p. 85), instead of the Projet socialiste, a text from another party that no statement by the candidate takes up (check of 21 October 2026; decision of 19 October 2026: documents from the candidate's own party count as his positions). Summary and quote replaced: capping the tax expenditures of the largest fortunes and turning them into budget appropriations came only from the Parti socialiste text; still not costed. Quote to be checked by the editors.Version 4
Tax and social security fraudCosting revised: the only source is the Projet socialiste, a Parti socialiste text adopted before the candidate was designated; neither his statements nor the texts of Place publique, the party he co-chairs, take it up (check of 21 October 2026). A party's position is not that of its candidate: position cited, not costed, as the reason says (it was already not costed).Version 4
Inheritance and gift taxCosting revised: the abolition of the Dutreil pact, called for by Place publique, the candidate's party, on 3 February 2026 (« lutter contre les niches fiscales qui permettent l’optimisation des plus aisés : suppression du pacte Dutreil sur les transmissions d’entreprises » [“tackle the tax expenditures that allow the wealthiest to optimise: abolition of the Dutreil pact on business transfers”]), is counted under this lever with the cost schedule option (about €5bn of revenue at the centre, 3 to 5): decision of 19 October 2026, documents from the candidate's own party count as his positions, and the cost schedule files the Dutreil pact under inheritance tax. Taxing the largest inheritances remains not costed (no rate or scale): partial costing. The announced amount of €15bn does not cover the same scope: no gap calculated. Position put back for review.Version 7
Corporate income taxCosting revised: the only source is the Projet socialiste, a Parti socialiste text adopted before the candidate was designated; neither his statements nor the texts of Place publique, the party he co-chairs, take it up (check of 21 October 2026). A party's position is not that of its candidate: position cited, not costed, as the reason says (it was already not costed).Version 4
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsSource revised: position taken from the text of Place publique, the candidate's party (« Acte un », 2025, p. 20, already cited in version 1), instead of the Projet socialiste, a text from another party that no statement by the candidate takes up (check of 21 October 2026; decision of 19 October 2026: documents from the candidate's own party count as his positions). Summary and quote replaced. The “targeted” rise has no rate: position not costed; the associates' measure (tax at 10%, €2.29bn of revenue and as much earmarked spending, shown separately, never added) leaves the page. Quote to be checked by the editors.Version 7
Financial transaction taxCosting revised: the only source is the Projet socialiste, a Parti socialiste text adopted before the candidate was designated; neither his statements nor the texts of Place publique, the party he co-chairs, mention this tax (check of 21 October 2026). A party's position is not that of its candidate: position cited, not costed, as the reason says (it was already not costed, for lack of a rate).Version 4
Public hospitalsSource revised: position taken from the text of Place publique, the candidate's party (« Acte un », 2025, p. 50), instead of the Projet socialiste, a text from another party that no statement by the candidate takes up (check of 21 October 2026; decision of 19 October 2026: documents from the candidate's own party count as his positions). Summary and quote replaced; still not costed. Quote to be checked by the editors.Version 4
End of lifeSource revised: the only source remains the Projet socialiste, a Parti socialiste text adopted before the candidate was designated; neither his statements nor the texts of Place publique, the party he co-chairs, mention it (check of 21 October 2026). A party's position is not that of its candidate: it remains cited as a Parti socialiste text, without being costed, like public research, sexist and sexual violence, the digital services tax and the contribution period on 18 October 2026.Version 4
Prisons and sentencesSource revised: position taken from the text of Place publique, the candidate's party (« Acte un », 2025, p. 61), instead of the Projet socialiste, a text from another party that no statement by the candidate takes up (check of 21 October 2026; decision of 19 October 2026: documents from the candidate's own party count as his positions). Summary and quote replaced: the Place publique text does not mention new places; still not costed. Quote to be checked by the editors.Version 4
Violence against women and childrenSource revised: position taken from the text of Place publique, the candidate's party (« Acte un », 2025, p. 78, already cited in version 1), instead of the Projet socialiste, a text from another party that no statement by the candidate takes up (check of 21 October 2026; decision of 19 October 2026: documents from the candidate's own party count as his positions). Summary and quote replaced. Most cautious reading, the same for all (comprehensive law for Marine Tondelier, Fabien Roussel and François Ruffin): the billion, with neither “a year” nor “extra”, is read as a total, below existing spending (€1.5bn): position not costed; the associates' measure (€1.1bn, shown separately, never added) leaves the page. Quote to be checked by the editors.Version 5
Public broadcastingSource revised: position taken from the text of Place publique, the candidate's party (« Acte un », 2025, p. 47), instead of the Projet socialiste, a text from another party that no statement by the candidate takes up (check of 21 October 2026; decision of 19 October 2026: documents from the candidate's own party count as his positions). Summary and quote replaced: the Place publique text mentions neither a progressive contribution nor a holding company; direction “other” kept (strengthening with no funding stated); still not costed. Quote to be checked by the editors.Version 4

20 October 2026

1 correction · Jean-Luc Mélenchon (1)

Jean-Luc Mélenchon 1 correction

Tax and social security expendituresCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the two fully defined social expenditures are now costed (end of the employer deduction on overtime, €0.87bn to €1.02bn; end of the single tapered general reduction between 2 and 3 SMIC, €4.0bn to €5.1bn, editors' calculation); the trimming with no rate remains not costed and the €22bn announced remains cited.Version 8

19 October 2026

5 corrections · Gabriel Attal (1), Nicolas Dupont-Aignan (1), Raphaël Glucksmann (1), David Lisnard (1), Bruno Retailleau (1)

Gabriel Attal 1 correction

Reductions in social contributions on low wagesCosting revised: the note states plainly that the calculation excludes civil servants, as for the four candidates who raise net pay per employee (decision of 19 October 2026); amount unchanged.Version 6

Nicolas Dupont-Aignan 1 correction

Reductions in social contributions on low wagesCosting revised: the note states plainly that the calculation excludes civil servants, as for the four candidates who raise net pay per employee (decision of 19 October 2026); amount unchanged.Version 4

Raphaël Glucksmann 1 correction

Numbers and pay of civil servantsSource reviewed: position taken from the text of Place publique, the candidate's party (« Acte un », 2025, p. 40), instead of the Projet socialiste, the text of another party (decision of 19 October 2026: the documents of the candidate's own party count as his positions); the indexation of the public sector pay index point is costed as for the other candidates. Quote to be reread by the editors.Version 5

David Lisnard 1 correction

Reductions in social contributions on low wagesCosting revised: the note states plainly that the calculation excludes civil servants, as for the four candidates who raise net pay per employee (decision of 19 October 2026); amount unchanged.Version 6

Bruno Retailleau 1 correction

Reductions in social contributions on low wagesCosting revised: the note states plainly that the calculation excludes civil servants, as for the four candidates who raise net pay per employee (decision of 19 October 2026); amount unchanged.Version 7

18 October 2026

456 corrections · Gabriel Attal (24), Nicolas Dupont-Aignan (28), Raphaël Glucksmann (37), Marine Le Pen (60), David Lisnard (22), Jean-Luc Mélenchon (55), Édouard Philippe (31), Bruno Retailleau (48), Fabien Roussel (37), François Ruffin (22), Marine Tondelier (38), Éric Zemmour (54)

Gabriel Attal 24 corrections

Reductions in social contributions on low wagesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the objective of a gain equivalent to a thirteenth month's pay is costed as an 8.33% increase in the net wage of all private-sector employees (parameter « hausse du salaire net de tous les salariés » [“increase in the net wage of all employees”]), same base and same method as the other net wage increases defined per employee.Version 5
Unemployment, work period required to qualify for benefitsCosting revised: position created for fairness with Bruno Retailleau, from the same source as the “benefit duration” position (attalpresident.fr, « Travail & salaires » workstream), read together with the report of the interview with Le Parisien published by the campaign website (3 July 2026): « la reprise de la réforme de l'assurance chômage initiée lorsqu'il était Premier ministre » [“the resumption of the unemployment insurance reform initiated when he was Prime Minister”], that of the June 2024 rules. Same treatment as for Bruno Retailleau, who wants to apply these rules: their eligibility condition, 8 months of work in the last 20 months, is costed through the parameter of required work duration (6 months today), by flagged linear extrapolation, as an assumption and in part (20-month reference period and recharging of entitlements not costed).Version 2
Unemployment, max. benefit durationCosting revised: the eligibility condition of the June 2024 rules (8 months of work in the last 20) is now costed under the « accès » position, created for this candidate as for Bruno Retailleau; the note says so. Amount for the duration unchanged.Version 5
Unemployment, max. benefit durationCosting revised: the campaign website presents the measure as « la reprise de la réforme de l'assurance chômage initiée lorsqu'il était Premier ministre » [“the resumption of the unemployment insurance reform initiated when he was Prime Minister”] (report of the interview with Le Parisien, 3 July 2026), that of the June 2024 rules, which the dissolution prevented from coming into force (« Dette de l'État » page of the programme). Same treatment as for Bruno Retailleau, who wants to apply these rules: their maximum duration of 15 months is costed through the duration parameter (18 months today), by flagged linear extrapolation, as an assumption and in part, lower bound at the centre (gain acknowledged as overestimated). Summary and direction aligned.Version 4
Pension indexationCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); 2028 freeze year costed with the common assumption (inflation of 1.75%), small pensions read as pensions below the median: about €2.9bn net savings per year in 2032 (2.6 to 3.7).Version 5
Pension indexationSource revised: the quote mixed his words with the news-agency wording (« plaide-t-il » [“he argues”]); it now keeps only his words, quoted in quotation marks, and the date is that of the interview (published on 2 July 2026). His more recent texts give no further detail: « un "frein d'urgence" sur l'ensemble des dépenses sociales, avec une année blanche » [“an ‘emergency brake’ on all social spending, with a freeze year”] (campaign website, 20 September 2026). Direction unchanged; position put back to being checked; still not costed.Version 3
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCosting revised: most recent source rule. The interview with Le Parisien of 3 July 2026 (report on the campaign website), later than the amendment of October 2025, rules out « toute hausse d'impôt durant son quinquennat » [“any tax increase during his five-year term”]: the position is no longer costed (€3.62bn of revenue removed).Version 5
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCosting revised: the note now says that the €2bn threshold, not modelled, makes the amount overestimated; partial costing maintained, at the same 15% rate as François Ruffin’s position, now costed at the increased rate of his amendment; since the amount is acknowledged to be overestimated, the central value is brought down to the lower bound of the coefficient (yield of one point based on the revised forecast for 2026), under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: €3.6bn instead of 3.9.Version 4
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCosting revised: the cost schedule now costs the rate of the digital services tax (parameter added on 18 October 2026, coefficient calculated by the editors); the position, previously not costed, is now costed at the rate cited, as an assumption and in part (raised threshold not costed).Version 3
Pupils per class, primaryCosting revised: single « net » convention for public staff (rule R9): at the centre, cost excluding all employer contributions paid to other general government bodies, converted to pay for active staff using the ratio from the PAP 2024 (about 1.15, editors’ calculation); full employer cost as upper bound. Central value 0.6 → €0.5bn.Version 6
Pupils per class, primaryCosting revised: under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all, an overall public staffing target is no longer counted net of the posts created under sectoral levers, since no source says so; the candidate’s source moreover places Education, the Armed Forces, Justice and the Interior outside the 100,000 cuts. Teaching posts, previously displayed without being added, are now added: €0.6bn (0.5 to 0.85).Version 5
Pupils per class, primaryCosting revised: the position was not costed because it was unclear whether it was an average or a cap, whereas the targets of Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Marine Tondelier, equally imprecise, are read as an average; same reading here, costed at the bound of the target, as an assumption and in part.Version 4
Teachers' payCosting revised: single « net » convention for public staff (rule R9): at the centre, cost excluding all employer contributions paid to other general government bodies, converted to pay for active staff using the ratio from the PAP 2024 (about 1.15, editors’ calculation); full employer cost as upper bound. Central value 2.74 → €2.38bn; the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4).Version 4
Ability groups, organisation of lower secondary schoolCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); extension of ability groups to 4e and 3e costed by extrapolating the posts of the 6e and 5e groups (cost-schedule option), instead of « non chiffré » [“not costed”].Version 3
School timetablesSource revised: only « véritable révolution du temps scolaire » [“genuine revolution in school time”] was his own wording in the AFP dispatch picked up by Sud Radio; « sport, culture et arts à partir de 15 heures » [“sport, culture and arts from 3 pm”] was AFP’s sentence. The position is now taken from the text published with his video of 14 October 2026 on his YouTube channel: lessons would end at 3 pm, with the afternoon also going to « l'accompagnement scolaire » [“tutoring”]. In the video, he presents this « véritable révolution du temps scolaire » [“genuine revolution in school time”] as a reflection to be conducted « avec les jeunes, avec les professeurs, avec les personnels de direction » [“with young people, with teachers, with school management staff”]; his campaign website speaks of a « concertation » [“consultation”] (11 October 2026). Position put back to being checked.Version 5
Resources for the justice systemCosting revised: single « net » convention for public staff (rule R9): at the centre, cost excluding all employer contributions paid to other general government bodies, converted to pay for active staff using the ratio from the PAP 2024 (about 1.15, editors’ calculation); full employer cost as upper bound. Central value 0.18 → €0.15bn; the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4).Version 4
Resources for the justice systemCosting revised: under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all, an overall public staffing target is no longer counted net of the posts created under sectoral levers, since no source says so; the candidate’s source moreover places Education, the Armed Forces, Justice and the Interior outside the 100,000 cuts. Justice jobs, previously displayed without being added, are now added: €0.18bn (0.15 to 0.27).Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 5
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the post creations costed under the “Pupils per class, primary” and “Resources for the justice system” levers, previously included in this net figure, are now added (rule of 18 October 2026, common to all; the candidate’s source places Education, the Armed Forces, Justice and the Interior outside the 100,000 cuts). Amount unchanged.Version 4
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 7
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: since the amount is acknowledged to be overestimated beyond the six EPR2s of the PPE3, the following ones being disbursed later than the coefficient assumes, the central value is brought down to the lower bound of the coefficient (€0.61bn per reactor, EDF estimate of December 2025, 60% financed by a State loan paid out over 12 years), under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: €4.9bn instead of 5.8 (range unchanged, 4.9 to 9.6). State loan, counted in the debt, separately from the balance.Version 6
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited fell outside the measured range of the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such: fourteen reactors, in part.Version 5
Electricity prices, European marketCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); target energy price not costed, with the reason common to all candidates (editors' decision). Position still not costed.Version 4
Additional public investment, per yearCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); envelope taken at the candidate's amount and brought down to an annual figure over the horizon the candidate gives (ten years).Version 4

Nicolas Dupont-Aignan 28 corrections

Reductions in social contributions on low wagesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the 8% increase in the net wage up to 3 times the SMIC (minimum wage) is costed on the private-sector net wage bill up to 3 times the SMIC (« hausse du salaire net jusqu'à 3 SMIC » [“increase in the net wage up to 3 times the SMIC”] parameter), the same method as the other net wage increases defined per employee.Version 3
Profit sharing (participation, intéressement)Costing revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the exemption of profit-sharing (participation) from the forfait social is costed on its base (20% of €12.1bn, at most €2.42bn), the corporate income tax (IS) cut linked to employee share ownership remaining not costed.Version 3
Nurseries and childcareCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 4
Nurseries and childcareCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited fell outside the parameter's measured range; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such.Version 3
Legal retirement ageSource revised: the quote mixed his words with the sentences of the Europe 1 journalist (« Face à un système à l'agonie, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan ne fait pas partie de ceux qui… » [“Faced with a system in its death throes, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan is not one of those who…”]); it now keeps only his words, cited in quotation marks. Direction and costing unchanged; position put back to being checked.Version 4
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 3
Funded shareCosting revised: the note states that the announced resource, half of the contribution to the European Union, is now costed under its lever (€14.22bn, same reading as for Marine Le Pen and Éric Zemmour); it is not deducted here. Amount unchanged.Version 5
Funded shareCosting revised: the note states that the amount is an upper bound (all births counted, not only French newborns); under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: when the note acknowledges a bias in the costing, the central value is brought down to the bound that corrects it (lower bound for an overestimate); here, the lower bound of the coefficient, which has only one value (births multiplied by the amount): amount unchanged, reason now displayed on the line.Version 4
Family quotientCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); same treatment as the complete removal of the cap (Lisnard), now costed by the Cour des comptes (€4.9bn), which bounds the extrapolation of the cap to €3,000; amount unchanged.Version 5
Family quotientCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 4
Family quotientCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited fell outside the parameter's measured range; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such.Version 3
Tax and social security expendituresCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the restoration of a « type Pinel » [“Pinel-type”] advantage is read as the last Pinel scheme and costed on the IGF-CGEDD (finance and environment inspectorates) evaluation (€0.6bn to €1.2bn in 2032, editors' assumption).Version 4
Inheritance and gift taxCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the Pacte Dutreil raised to 90% (CPO (Council for Compulsory Levies) 2025) and the gift allowance doubled (PLFR (supplementary finance bill) 2012) are costed, €1.5bn to €1.7bn; the main residence and the 100 hectares of farmland remain not costed (partial costing).Version 5
VATCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the end of VAT on the excise duty on motor fuels is costed on the excise duty paid by households (€3.8bn to €4.0bn); the 50 products, which are not listed, remain not costed (partial costing).Version 4
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCosting revised: the reason said that the cost schedule only costs the abolition of the digital services tax; since 18 October 2026 it also costs its rate, which the position does not target. Position still not costed.Version 3
Teachers' payCosting revised: single “net” convention for public staff (rule R9): at the centre, cost excluding all employer contributions paid to other general government bodies, related to pay for active staff using the PAP 2024 ratio (about 1.15, editors' calculation); full employer cost as the upper bound. Central value 6.15 → €5.36bn; the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors' assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4).Version 3
University tuition feesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the reaffirmed principle of free tuition is read as keeping current fees (status quo), instead of not costed.Version 3
Research, share of GDPCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); target of 3% of GDP costed on its public share, read for all according to the Barcelona target (one third of the increase), instead of “not costed”.Version 3
Police and gendarmerie numbersCosting revised: single “net” convention for public staff (rule R9): at the centre, cost excluding all employer contributions paid to other general government bodies, related to pay for active staff using the PAP 2024 ratio (about 1.15, editors' calculation); full employer cost as the upper bound. Central value 0.52 → €0.45bn; the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors' assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4).Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); indexation of the public sector pay index point to inflation costed with the common inflation assumption (1.75% a year, five upratings from 2028 to 2032), cost schedule option, instead of “not costed”.Version 3
Electricity prices, European marketCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); target energy price not costed, with the reason common to all candidates (editors' decision). Position still not costed.Version 3
Citizens' initiative referendum (RIC)Costing revised: RIC treated as an institutional reform outside the budget, a reason common to all candidates (decision of 18 October 2026).Version 3
Right of asylumCosting revised: rule common to the four positions costed by the gain per asylum application (Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, Bruno Retailleau, David Lisnard, Édouard Philippe, 18 October 2026): the note acknowledges that the shifts to emergency accommodation and to State medical aid (aide médicale de l'État) are not counted, so the gain is overestimated; central value brought down to the lower bound of the cost per application (« central » [“central”] rule).Version 4
Right of asylumCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); applications lodged on French territory counted as fewer applications (demandes-asile parameter), instead of not costed.Version 3
State medical aid (Aide médicale de l'État)Costing revised: the abolition of AME replaced by emergency care is now costed using the « aide médicale d'urgence » [“emergency medical aid”] option, like the positions of David Lisnard and Bruno Retailleau, as an assumption.Version 4
Place in the European UnionCosting revised: same « baisse supposée obtenue » [“cut assumed to be obtained”] reading as for Marine Le Pen and Éric Zemmour (contribution-ue parameter, common rule of 18 October 2026); the announcement of 11 October 2026, « dégager la moitié de la contribution à l'Union Européenne » [“free up half of the contribution to the European Union”], is costed on half of the levy voted for 2026 (€28.44bn): a gain of €14.22bn, instead of not costed; leaving the EU by referendum, which is conditional, remains not costed.Version 4
Support for UkraineCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 4
Support for UkraineCosting revised: the announced amount includes the French share of European aid, outside the costing: it is now flagged as having a different scope. Amount unchanged.Version 3

Raphaël Glucksmann 37 corrections

Net monthly SMIC (minimum wage)Costing revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 3
Unemployment, max. benefit durationCosting revised: the repeals of the unemployment insurance reforms are costed for Jean-Luc Mélenchon, Fabien Roussel and Marine Tondelier; same treatment here, with the most cautious reading of « la réforme Macron » [“the Macron reform”], that of 2019-2021, costed under the “Benefit amount and tapering” lever (position added), as a hypothesis and in part. Nothing is costed on this duration lever.Version 3
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); automatic payment costed (versement-automatique-rsa option), a measure of the candidate's associates (Projet socialiste), instead of not costed.Version 4
Nurseries and childcareCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); shortfall of 200,000 childcare places read as a target (places-accueil parameter), a measure of the candidate's associates (Projet socialiste), instead of not costed.Version 4
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the note acknowledges that the uncosted counterpart would reduce the displayed cost; under the acknowledged-bias rule, the central value goes to the lower bound of the coefficient (12.78 → €10.15bn of spending), range unchanged. The position is also flagged by the engine as an editors’ hypothesis, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4).Version 4
Contribution periodCosting revised: the only source is the Projet socialiste, a Parti socialiste text adopted before the candidate was designated, which no statement by the latter takes up (check of 18 October 2026). A party’s position is not that of its candidate: position cited, not costed (the status quo, at zero cost, no longer counts in the coverage).Version 4
Income tax scaleCosting revised: the CDHR (differential contribution on high incomes), which the position asks to maintain, is no longer temporary; the finance act for 2026 extended it until the general budget deficit is below 3% of GDP (Voies et moyens, PLF 2027, volume I, p. 30). Maintaining it is current law: status quo, instead of €1.5bn of revenue (rule common to all).Version 3
CSG (general social contribution)Source reviewed: the quote was franceinfo’s report, which gave only fragments of his words (« baisser "la CSG sur les salaires pour les salariés" » [“lower ‘the CSG on wages for employees’”]); it is now his full sentence, quoted word for word by AFP (same debate, same day). Direction and costing unchanged (€13.6bn decrease in revenue as the central value); position marked as being checked again.Version 8
CSG (general social contribution)Costing revised: the rule on earmarked pairs one of whose terms cannot be costed is cancelled, because it only applied to funding through a revenue and not to funding through other candidates’ uncosted overall savings, which remained counted. A single rule for all: the CSG decrease, which can be costed, is counted again (−1.24 points, €13.6bn decrease in revenue as the central value, 15 as the upper bound, hypothesis); its revenue from inheritances, which cannot be costed, remains displayed as an announced amount, not added.Version 7
CSG (general social contribution)Costing revised: the amount cited for reference, not counted, follows the correction of the coefficient of the CSG on earned income (the effect on income tax concerns only the deductible part, 6.8 points out of 9.2): €13.6bn net instead of 13.1. Position still not costed.Version 6
CSG (general social contribution)Costing revised: rule on earmarked pairs one of whose terms cannot be costed. The same sentence funds the CSG decrease by taxing the largest inheritances, a revenue with no rate or schedule: neither the decrease nor its revenue is added. Position not costed (the €13.1bn decrease in revenue counted as the central value since version 4 is removed from the totals); the announced €15bn remains cited, with its direction.Version 5
CSG (general social contribution)Costing revised: the €15bn announced « sur la fiche de paie » [“onto the payslip”] is costed as a decrease in the CSG on earned income (15 ÷ 12.1 ≈ 1.24 points, rate from 9.2% to 7.96%), as a hypothesis: about €13.1bn decrease in revenue as the central value (15 gross). Announced amount: direction declared as “revenue decrease”.Version 4
Flat-rate levy on capital (flat tax)Costing revised: the Projet socialiste of 25 June 2026 is a Parti socialiste text, adopted before the candidate was designated, which no statement by the latter takes up (check of 18 October 2026); the most-recent-source rule therefore does not make it attributable to the candidate. Return to the previous source, the text of Place publique, the party the candidate co-chairs (3 February 2026: PFU raised from 30 to 34%), and to its costing: about €1.07bn of revenue instead of 1.9.Version 4
Flat-rate levy on capital (flat tax)Costing revised: most-recent-source rule. The Projet socialiste of 25 June 2026, later than Place publique’s text of 3 February 2026 (PFU at 34%), abolishes the flat tax (prélèvement forfaitaire unique): quote, source and summary replaced, position costed as the abolition of the PFU (€1.9bn of revenue instead of 1.07), in part (increase in the CSG on capital, with no rate, not costed).Version 3
Public aid to businessesSource reviewed: the quote began with the franceinfo journalist’s sentence (« entend notamment réduire les aides publiques aux entreprises » [“intends notably to reduce public aid to businesses”]); it now keeps only his words. His word is « réorienter » [“redirect”], not « réduire » [“reduce”]: the summary says so and the direction of change goes from “decrease” to “other”. Position marked as being checked again; still not costed.Version 3
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Source reviewed: the quote mixed his words with the Le Figaro journalist’s sentence; it now keeps only his words, quoted in quotation marks. He also says: « pourquoi baisser les APL ce n'est pas tabou mais augmenter la taxation des plus hauts patrimoines, c'est tabou ? » [“why is cutting the APL not taboo, but increasing the taxation of the largest fortunes is taboo?”] (franceinfo, 21 September 2026). Direction unchanged; position marked as being checked again; still not costed.Version 3
Inheritance and gift taxCosting revised: the rule on earmarked pairs one of whose terms cannot be costed is cancelled (a single rule for all: a costable measure is counted, an uncostable source of funding is cited without being added); the CSG decrease funded by this revenue is once again counted under the CSG lever. Position still not costed, announced amount unchanged.Version 6
Inheritance and gift taxCosting revised: rule on earmarked pairs one of whose terms cannot be costed. This revenue, with no rate or schedule, funds, in the same sentence, the increase in net pay (decrease in the CSG on wages): the reason says so, and the decrease is no longer added either. Position still not costed, announced amount unchanged.Version 5
Taxes on fuel and energySource reviewed: the quote mixed his words with sentences by the Capital journalist (« Pour lui, une baisse généralisée des taxes serait injuste socialement » [“For him, a general cut in taxes would be socially unfair”], « plaide pour un triplement du chèque énergie » [“argues for tripling the energy voucher”]); it now keeps only his words, quoted in quotation marks. The tripling, the journalist’s word, is removed from the summary; he himself says elsewhere « Il faut faire passer le chèque énergie de 150 euros à 500 euros » [“The energy voucher must be raised from 150 euros to 500 euros”] (L'EnerGeek, 3 October 2026), cited in the note. Costing unchanged (status quo); position marked as being checked again.Version 3
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); measure of the candidate's associates costed separately (decision of 18 October 2026): digital services tax at 10% (€2.29bn) and earmarked spending of the same amount, shown without being added.Version 6
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCosting revised: the only source is the Projet socialiste, a Parti socialiste text adopted before the candidate was designated, which no statement by the latter takes up (check of 18 October 2026). A party’s position is not that of its candidate: position cited, not costed (€2.29bn of revenue and €2.29bn of earmarked spending removed from the totals, net effect on the balance roughly zero).Version 5
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCosting revised: earmarked revenue rule. The spending that the same sentence funds (European digital sovereignty) is costed at the same amount as the revenue, €2.29bn of new spending; the position is no longer partial and its net effect on the balance is roughly zero.Version 4
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCosting revised: the cost schedule now costs the rate of the digital services tax (parameter added on 18 October 2026, coefficient calculated by the editors); the position, previously not costed, is costed at the rate cited, as a hypothesis and in part (earmarking of the proceeds not costed).Version 3
Windfall profits and share buybacksSource reviewed: the quote mixed his words with the franceinfo journalist’s sentence; it now keeps only his words, quoted in quotation marks. Direction unchanged; position marked as being checked again; still not costed.Version 3
Financial transaction taxCosting revised: the reason said that the cost schedule only costs the abolition of the tax; it has also costed its rate since 18 October 2026. Position still not costed (rate not given).Version 3
Research, share of GDPCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); Projet socialiste measure costed on the public share it states (at least 1% of GDP) and marked “associates” (shown separately, not added), decision of 18 October 2026.Version 6
Research, share of GDPCosting revised: the only source is the Projet socialiste, a Parti socialiste text adopted before the candidate was designated, which no statement by the latter takes up (check of 18 October 2026). A party’s position is not that of its candidate: position cited, not costed (€9.1bn of spending as the central value is removed from the totals).Version 5
Research, share of GDPCosting revised: « au moins 1 % » [“at least 1%”] is costed at this floor and now flagged as partial, like any “at least” value (rule of 18 October 2026, common to all). Amount unchanged.Version 4
Violence against women and childrenCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); Projet socialiste measure costed with the cautious reading applied to all (total amount, difference from existing spending) and marked “associates” (shown separately, not added), decision of 18 October 2026.Version 4
Violence against women and childrenCosting revised: the only source is the Projet socialiste, a Parti socialiste text adopted before the candidate was designated, which no statement by the latter takes up (check of 18 October 2026). A party’s position is not that of its candidate: position cited, not costed (€1.1bn of spending removed from the totals); the €2.6bn in the party’s text, cited until now as an announced amount, is not an announcement by the candidate and is cited in the reason.Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the reason no longer says that the cost schedule has no coefficient for an indexation rule (it has had one since this pass); position still not costed.Version 4
Existing nuclear fleetSource reviewed: the position relied on remarks by Yannick Jadot (AFP dispatch of 25 August 2026), an ecologist senator who has rallied to the candidate, who is neither the candidate nor his party; that day, the candidate was not speaking about the existing fleet. It is now taken from his party’s text, Place publique’s « Acte un » (p. 17): « en assurant la sûreté des centrales existantes » [“by ensuring the safety of existing plants”]. Maintaining skills, which only Yannick Jadot mentioned, is removed from the summary. Position marked as being checked again.Version 3
Electricity prices, European marketCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the cancellation of the 2024 excise duty increase, a tax measure, is now costed on the new parameter for the tariff of sites of 36 kVA or less (same base for all); the price rule receives the common reason for target prices.Version 4
Citizens' initiative referendum (RIC)Costing revised: RIC treated as an institutional reform outside the budget, a reason common to all candidates (decision of 18 October 2026).Version 3
Labour immigration and residence permitsSource reviewed: the quote mixed his words with sentences by the LCP journalist; it now keeps only his words, quoted in quotation marks (« [la régularisation] » is a clarification by LCP, in response to a question on the regularisation of undocumented workers). His party’s text says the same: « Faciliter les démarches de régularisation des travailleurs sans papiers » [“Facilitate regularisation procedures for undocumented workers”] (Place publique, « Acte un », p. 82). Direction unchanged; position marked as being checked again.Version 3
Place in the European UnionSource reviewed: the quote was entirely LCP’s rewording of his book « Nous avons encore envie » (May 2026). It is now taken from his written answers to Le Grand Continent (6 October 2026), his most recent source on Europe: the end of the right of veto becomes the move to qualified majority, « notamment en termes de politique étrangère et de fiscalité » [“notably in terms of foreign policy and taxation”], with own resources « décuplées » [“increased tenfold”]. The « grand emprunt européen » [“major European loan”], absent from his 2026 words, is removed from the summary. Position marked as being checked again; still not costed.Version 3
Support for UkraineSource reviewed: the seizure of Russian assets was a sentence by the LCP journalist; the position is now taken from his written answers to Le Grand Continent (6 October 2026): increase aid, an air-defence shield, and seize « les plus de 210 milliards d'euros d'avoirs russes gelés en Europe » [“the more than 210 billion euros of frozen Russian assets in Europe”] (not « publics » [“public”], the journalist’s word). Position marked as being checked again; still not costed.Version 3

Marine Le Pen 60 corrections

RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); upper limit taken from the share of RSA households with a foreign head (Cnaf and MSA, 2022), cited in the reason; position still not costed (share of recipients with less than five years of work unknown).Version 5
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsSource reviewed: reserving solidarity benefits for foreigners who have worked five years was franceinfo's sentence, outside the candidate's words in quotation marks. The position is now taken from the RN document itself, the 2026 counter-budget (23 October 2025, p. 7), which expects €6.1bn from it; the RN's programme for the 2024 legislative elections names the RSA. Position returned to being checked; still not costed.Version 3
Family allowancesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); allowances reserved for French nationals costed by the common rule (decision 4: share of foreigners in the population, upper bound pending from the Cnaf), instead of not costed.Version 6
Family allowancesSource reviewed: the subsidy for the third child is no longer taken from CNews's report on the counter-budget of 6 October 2026, but from an RN document, its programme for the 2024 legislative elections (« Créer un prêt public à taux zéro transformé en subvention pour les couples qui ont un 3ème enfant » [“Create a public zero-interest loan converted into a subsidy for couples who have a 3rd child”], p. 9). Position still not costed.Version 5
Automatic payment, single social allowanceSource reviewed: the single social allowance appeared in a list by Reuters (Boursorama), with no quote from the candidate. The position is now taken from her own words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel), where she presents it as part of the fight against benefit fraud. Position returned to being checked; still not costed.Version 3
Old age and long-term careSource reviewed: the position relied on CNews's report on the counter-budget of 6 October 2026, in which the €2bn increase in the budget for family carers is a journalist's sentence, with no quote from the candidate or the RN; the RN press kit is not published online and no other source gives this amount. The announced amount is removed; the position is now taken from an RN document, its programme for the 2024 legislative elections (« Renforcer le soutien aux proches-aidants » [“Strengthen support for family carers”], p. 7), with no amount. Position returned to being checked; still not costed.Version 3
Legal retirement ageSource reviewed: the position relied on a sentence by an Entrevue journalist (« Marine Le Pen maintient son objectif… » [“Marine Le Pen maintains her objective…”]), with no quote from the candidate. It is now taken from her own words, at the candidates' debate before the Medef on 27 August 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel): « un âge légal de 62 ans » [“a legal retirement age of 62”]. The financing of €15bn to €20bn « à terme » [“in the long run”] is cited in her words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026. Position returned to being checked; amount unchanged.Version 6
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: correction of the calculation engine, the same for all; the share in common with the contribution period (about €1.8bn at the centre, zero at the bounds) was subtracted from the cost of the contribution period, distorting its lower bound (€1.21bn instead of €2bn); it is now subtracted from this cost, each bound keeping its place: €11bn at the centre (€10.15bn to €15.75bn) instead of €12.78bn. The sum of the two lines at the centre is unchanged (€14bn); the lower bound of the sum rises by €0.8bn.Version 5
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 4
Contribution periodSource reviewed: the LCP quote omitted « jusqu'à 24 ans et demi » [“up to 24 and a half”], which the candidate says in the video of the debate published on her official YouTube channel: « progressivement » [“gradually”] refers to the age at which a career starts, from 40 years of contributions for a start before 20 to 42 years for a start at 24 and a half. The note is corrected; contribution periods between 40 and 42 years for a start between 20 and 24 and a half are not costed (partial costing). Position returned to being checked; amount unchanged.Version 5
Contribution periodCosting revised: correction of the calculation engine, the same for all; the share in common with the legal retirement age, which varies from one bound to the other, distorted the lower bound of this line (€1.21bn instead of €2bn). It is now subtracted from the cost of the age, each bound keeping its place: €3bn at the centre (€2bn to €4bn) instead of €1.21bn (€1.21bn to €4bn). The sum of the two lines at the centre is unchanged.Version 4
Long careersSource reviewed: the franceinfo quote cut the candidate's words (« effectif (...) avant 20 ans (...) partiront à 60 ans » [“actual (...) before 20 (...) will retire at 60”]) and omitted the contribution period. It is now taken from the video of the debate published on her official YouTube channel, where she says « cotiseront 40 ans » [“will contribute for 40 years”]; the reason for not costing, which said this period was not specified, is corrected. Position returned to being checked; still not costed.Version 3
Pension indexationCorrected and validated by the editors: quote aligned with the video, double transcriptionVersion 5
Pension indexationSource reviewed: in the TF1info report, the rejection of de-indexation was the journalist's sentence (« Une mesure contre laquelle se prononce la candidate… » [“A measure the candidate opposes…”]). The position is now taken from her answer itself, in the video of the interview published on her official YouTube channel. Position returned to being checked; content unchanged (status quo).Version 4
Pension indexationCosting revised: the reading “maintaining the indexation rule” is now flagged as an assumption, as for the other candidates who defend pension indexation (status quo).Version 3
10% allowance on pensionsSource reviewed: in the LCP report, only the words « une ligne rouge » [“a red line”] were Jean-Philippe Tanguy's; the object (the pension freeze or the abolition of pensioners' tax allowance) was the journalist's sentence. The position is now taken from an RN document, the 2026 counter-budget (23 October 2025, p. 7), which rejects the flat-rate allowance of the budget bill for 2026 and keeps the 10% allowance. Position returned to being checked; content unchanged (status quo).Version 4
Funded shareSource reviewed: in the Entrevue report, only the words « véritable pilier de capitalisation » [“genuine funded pillar”] were the candidate's; « individuel et collectif » [“individual and collective”] and the complement to the pay-as-you-go system were the journalist's sentence. The position is now taken from her own words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel). Position returned to being checked; content unchanged, still not costed.Version 3
Family quotientCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the full share for the second child is costed on the published breakdown of the family quotient by family size (€2.2bn to €3.0bn, editors' assumption).Version 5
Family quotientSource reviewed: the position relied on CNews's report on the counter-budget of 6 October 2026, in which the full tax share from the second child is a journalist's sentence, with no quote from the candidate or the RN. It is now taken from the RN document itself, the 2026 counter-budget published on rassemblementnational.fr (press conference of 23 October 2025, p. 7), which costs it at €2.86bn; the RN's programme for the 2024 legislative elections already included it (« Instituer une part fiscale complète dès le deuxième enfant » [“Introduce a full tax share from the second child”], p. 9). Position returned to being checked; still not costed.Version 3
Tax and social security fraudSource reviewed: the position relied on the Reuters sentence (Boursorama) according to which levying VAT at source would represent « selon elle » [“according to her”] a gain of €26bn. In her own words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel), €26bn is the size of VAT fraud, not an announced gain: the announced amount is removed. The RN's 2026 counter-budget (23 October 2025, p. 7), which expects €3.5bn from « Lutte contre les fraudes » [“Combating fraud”], all types of fraud combined, is cited. Position returned to being checked; still not costed.Version 3
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Corrected and validated by the editors: quote aligned with the video, double transcriptionVersion 4
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Source reviewed: the position relied on a sentence by an Entrevue journalist (« Marine Le Pen confirme sa volonté… » [“Marine Le Pen confirms her intention…”]), with no quote from the candidate. It is now taken from her own words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel). The amount the RN's 2026 counter-budget expects from the tax on financial wealth (€4bn, p. 7) is cited, not counted. Position returned to being checked; still not costed.Version 3
VATSource reviewed: the costing no longer relies on two media outlets' reading of the counter-budget of 6 October 2026 (gas and electricity for franceinfo; motor fuels, wood and heating oil in addition for CNews), two journalists' reports with no quote from the candidate on this point; the RN press kit is not published online. Costing revised: the energy sources the candidate herself cites on 16 September 2026 (motor fuels, electricity, gas, heating oil) are costed, at 5.5%, the rate she gives for energy (November 2025) and for motor fuels (18 September 2026): €9.52bn instead of €3.15bn. Wood, which only the RN counter-budget of 23 October 2025 adds, is not costed (partial).Version 7
VATCosting revised: only the energy sources cited are costed, one by one (rule common to all). In the counter-budget of 6 October 2026, the most recent source, franceinfo reports a VAT cut on gas and electricity, CNews adds motor fuels, wood and heating oil: the most cautious reading, gas and electricity, is costed (€3.15bn instead of €9.52bn), the rest not costed (partial).Version 6
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCorrected and validated by the editors: quote aligned with the video, double transcriptionVersion 5
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsSource reviewed: in the AFP dispatch (Brut), support for the « impôt universel » [“universal tax”] on multinationals was the journalist's sentence; the candidate's words in quotation marks did not name the measure. The position is now taken from her own words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel), the most recent source: corporate income tax applied to the share of turnover generated in France. The €26bn expected by the supporters of the 2025 amendment are no longer cited. Position returned to being checked; still not costed.Version 4
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCosting revised: the reason said that the cost schedule only costs the abolition of the digital services tax; since 18 October 2026 it also costs its rate, which the position does not target. Position still not costed.Version 3
Production taxesSource reviewed: the position relied on a franceinfo sentence (« Le plan s'adresse aussi aux entreprises du tissu industriel, en diminuant les impôts de production » [“The plan is also aimed at companies in the industrial fabric, by reducing production taxes”]), with no quote from the candidate, and its reading on a report, by the Institut de l'Entreprise, of an unpublished RN annex. It is now taken from the candidate's own words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel): a €20bn cut, without saying which taxes. The taxes concerned are read from the RN document, the 2026 counter-budget (CFE, CVAE and C3S abolished, €16.2bn, p. 7). Costing unchanged (€5.2bn at the centre, assumption, partial); announced amount of €20bn added, on a different scope. Position returned to being checked.Version 3
Windfall profits and share buybacksCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the counter-budget's tax on share buybacks is read as the RN's amendment to the PLF 2026 (33% rate) and costed on the current base (€0.63bn, assumption, partial costing).Version 5
Windfall profits and share buybacksSource reviewed: the position relied on the franceinfo sentence according to which the tax on share buybacks would be « supposée rapporter 11,4 milliards d'euros dès 2027 » [“supposed to raise €11.4bn from 2027”], with no quote from the candidate or the RN; the file of the counter-budget of 6 October 2026 is not published online. It is now taken from the RN document itself, the 2026 counter-budget (23 October 2025, p. 7), which expects €8.4bn from it: announced amount of €8.4bn instead of €11.4bn. Position returned to being checked; still not costed.Version 3
Public deficit targeted for 2032Source reviewed: the ceiling of 2.9% of GDP in 2032 was the sentence of the LCP journalist summarising the candidate's opinion piece (1 October 2026), outside her quotation marks. The position is now taken from her own words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel), the most recent source: a deficit « inférieur à 2,5 % » [“below 2.5%”] in 2032, an objective she says is more demanding than her golden rule. Value 2.5 instead of 2.9; direction of change corrected (unchanged → decrease) according to the lever's common rule (below 2.5%, decrease). Position returned to being checked.Version 4
Level of public spendingSource reviewed: the position relied on a sentence by an Entrevue journalist (« La candidate veut également… » [“The candidate also wants…”]), with no quote from the candidate. It is now taken from her own words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel). Position returned to being checked; content unchanged, still not costed.Version 3
Announced savingsSource reviewed: in the Public Sénat report, the €140bn of savings was the journalist's sentence; only the end of the agencies was in quotation marks. The position is now taken from the candidate's own words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel): €140bn « nets » [“net”] in 2032 « par rapport à 2026 » [“compared with 2026”]. The amounts announced in the opposite direction, cited in the reason, are now in her words. Position returned to being checked; still not costed.Version 4
Fiscal rulesSource reviewed: in the Public Sénat report, only the words « une règle d'or » [“a golden rule”] were the candidate's; inclusion in the Constitution and the referendum were the journalist's sentence. The position is now taken from her own words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel). Position returned to being checked; content unchanged.Version 4
State grants to local authoritiesSource reviewed: in the Public Sénat report, the centralisation of VAT revenue was the journalist's sentence, as were the €8.2bn demanded of local authorities in 2027, cited in the reason. The position is now taken from the candidate's own words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel); the reason instead cites the RN's 2026 counter-budget. Position returned to being checked; still not costed.Version 4
Social housingCorrected and validated by the editors: quote aligned with the video, double transcriptionVersion 5
Social housingSource reviewed: the quote was the AFP report (ICI), in which the repeal of the SRU law and the reserving of APL rested only on a single word of the candidate's in quotation marks. It now consists of her own words, in the video of the speech published on her official YouTube channel. Position returned to being checked; content unchanged, still not costed.Version 4
Personal housing benefits (APL)Costing revised: the note says why the central value is at 16.4% (share of spending measured and published, a minimum for all foreigners) whereas that for family allowances is at 9.1% (no published share, upper bound pending from the Cnaf); rule common to both candidates (decision 4 of 18 October 2026), amount unchanged.Version 6
Personal housing benefits (APL)Costing revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); APL reserved for French nationals costed by the common rule (decision 4), instead of not costed.Version 5
Personal housing benefits (APL)Source reviewed: in the AFP report (ICI), only the verb « réserver » [“reserve”] was the candidate's; the APL were named by the journalist. The position is now taken from her own words, in the video of the speech published on her official YouTube channel. Position returned to being checked; content unchanged, still not costed.Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsSource reviewed: the « au moins 200 000 postes en cinq ans » [“at least 200,000 posts in five years”] was the AFP's sentence (Sud Radio) attributing the figure to Jean-Philippe Tanguy, without his words in quotation marks; no source gives this figure in the words of the candidate, an associate or an RN document. The position is now taken from the candidate's own words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel), which announce fewer public employees with no number of posts. Costing revised: the cut of 200,000 employees is no longer counted; position not costed. Position returned to being checked.Version 5
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 4
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited fell outside the parameter's measured range; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such; « au moins » [“at least”] 200,000 posts, costed at this floor, partially.Version 3
Public broadcastingCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the “associates” label is removed: a document of the candidate's party counts as her position as long as she has no programme; costing unchanged, now added.Version 6
Public broadcastingCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); privatisation of « l'audiovisuel public » [“public broadcasting”] with no defined scope costed with the common reading (France Télévisions and Radio France at least, all the companies at most) and marked “associates” (RN programme of 2024), instead of “not costed”.Version 5
Public broadcastingSource reviewed: the position relied on a sentence by the Public Sénat journalist (« Marine le Pen et Jordan Bardella l'ont explicitement appelée de leurs vœux » [“Marine le Pen and Jordan Bardella explicitly called for it”]), with no quote. No recent statement by the candidate was found; the position is now taken from an RN document, its programme for the 2024 legislative elections (« Privatiser l'audiovisuel public » [“Privatise public broadcasting”], p. 10). The RN's 2026 counter-budget (23 October 2025, p. 7), more recent, plans for the 2026 budget alone a €0.154bn cut in the grant; it does not mention privatisation. Position returned to being checked; still not costed.Version 3
Energy renovations per yearCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the abolition of MaPrimeRénov', a named measure, is costed as for the other candidates who abolish it (end of aid for major renovations), the replacement zero-interest loan, with no volume, not being deducted.Version 3
Adaptation to climate changeSource reviewed: in the AFP dispatch (L'Info Durable), the breakdown of amounts by five-year term and the cost of the zero-interest loans (€600m to €700m of interest a year) were the journalist's sentences, outside Jean-Philippe Tanguy's words in quotation marks; no source gives this cost in the RN's words (Public Sénat writes that the MPs do not specify whether it is annual). The position is now taken from Public Sénat, which quotes the RN in quotation marks: « 10 milliards sur 5 ans tourné vers les publics les plus vulnérables » [“10 billion over 5 years aimed at the most vulnerable groups”]. Costing revised: €2bn a year instead of €2.6bn; the loan interest is no longer counted (partial). Position returned to being checked.Version 5
Adaptation to climate changeSource reviewed: the note no longer relies on CNews's report on the counter-budget of 6 October 2026 for the Fonds vert (its transformation is reported there by the journalist); it cites the RN document itself, the 2026 counter-budget (23 October 2025, p. 7), which plans the « Suppression du fonds vert hors dépenses pour inondations et feux de forêts » [“Abolition of the green fund except spending on floods and forest fires”]. Not counted, as before. Amount unchanged.Version 4
Adaptation to climate changeCosting revised: the interest on the zero-interest loans is costed at the bottom of the announced range (€600m to €700m a year); under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all, a value taken at the bottom of a range makes the costing partial. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Everyday transportCosting revised: the reason now cites free driving licences for young people with a clean criminal record, announced by the candidate at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel), a measure with no lever of its own in the grid and no announced amount. Position still not costed.Version 3
Article 49.3 and revision of the ConstitutionSource reviewed: in the AFP dispatch (Sud Radio), the use of Article 11 to bypass the Senate was the journalist's sentence; only the words « la voie la plus démocratique qui soit » [“the most democratic route there is”] were the candidate's. The position is now taken from her own words, in the video of the LCI interview of 16 September 2026 published on her official YouTube channel. Article 11, which she does not name in the sources read, is removed from the summary. Position returned to being checked.Version 3
Place in the European UnionCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); net contribution to the EU brought down to €5bn costed on the figures of the finance act for 2026 (voted levy, average returns), new cost schedule parameter, instead of “not costed”.Version 5
Place in the European UnionSource reviewed: the cut of « -8,9 milliards nets » [“-€8.9bn net”] was the AFP's sentence (France 24), with no quote from the candidate. The position is now taken from her own words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel): net contribution brought down « à 5 milliards d'euros seulement » [“to just €5bn”] through the renegotiation of the multiannual financial framework. The announced amount also cites the RN's 2026 counter-budget (€8.7bn). Position returned to being checked; still not costed.Version 3
Defence budgetCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the “associates” label is removed: the programme of the candidate's party, carried by its MPs, counts as her position; costing unchanged, added again.Version 6
Defence budgetCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); position marked “associates” (amendment by RN MPs, not taken up by the candidate in the sources read): costing unchanged, shown separately, not added, decision of 18 October 2026.Version 5
Defence budgetCosting revised: under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all, “at least X” is costed at X and marked partial; the level targeted for 2030 is read as that of 2032 (assumption), against the reference law of 2.5% of GDP.Version 4
Support for UkraineCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); end of financial support read as the ending of bilateral civil aid, military aid maintained (new cost schedule option), instead of “not costed”.Version 3
High cost of living overseasSource reviewed: the position relied on a sentence by an Entrevue journalist (« Le RN veut également supprimer l'octroi de mer… » [“The RN also wants to abolish the octroi de mer…”]), with no quote from the candidate. It is now taken from her own words, at her press conference of 6 October 2026 (video published on her official YouTube channel), the most recent source: end of the octroi de mer « intégralement compensé aux collectivités ultramarines » [“fully compensated to overseas local authorities”]. The RN's 2026 counter-budget (23 October 2025, p. 7) only planned a « Réforme » [“Reform”] of it (€0.5bn). Costing revised: the option “abolition with full compensation by the State” replaces abolition without further detail, at the same amounts (€1.6bn at the centre); the €3bn envelope by 2032 is not counted. Position returned to being checked.Version 5
High cost of living overseasCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 4

David Lisnard 22 corrections

Reductions in social contributions on low wagesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the cut is costed on its per-person rule, €400 net per month per private-sector employee (“uniform net gain per employee” parameter), i.e. about €100.6bn a year, instead of the announced €120bn used until now.Version 5
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: « impératif national urgent » [“urgent national imperative”] gives neither timetable nor generation; the word is not enough to adopt the accelerated increase. As for any position without a timetable, the most cautious option is used, 65 at the current pace (generations born 1968 to 1972): €4.7bn in 2035 instead of €8.4bn (rule common to all).Version 5
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the note cited the current pace as the lower bound of the option; it is now a separate option (“65 at the current pace”, €4.7bn), not used here because the source speaks of urgency. Central amount unchanged.Version 4
Pension indexationCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); indexation rule costed with the common assumption: basic pensions above €2,000 not uprated from 2028 to 2032, 8.75 cumulative points, about €11.1bn net savings a year in 2032 (9.8 to 14.1).Version 3
Funded shareCosting revised: no timetable in the source, not costed (same rule as for Éric Zemmour's « progressive » [“progressive”] funded pensions); the former costing (one tranche by 2032, about €14.5bn a year in transition cost) is cited in the reason, the €116bn target alongside the totals.Version 5
Funded shareCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); transition costed on the candidate's target (€116bn in about 8 tranches) and the yield of one point of pension contributions: one tranche by 2032, 2.34 points, about €14.5bn a year in transition cost (11.2 to 17.8).Version 4
CSG (general social contribution)Costing revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); full deductibility of the CSG and the CRDS is costed on the value of the point published by the CCSS (€5.5bn to €5.8bn of income tax lost, editors' assumption); the cut in the CSG, with no rate, remains not costed (partial costing).Version 3
Family quotientCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the complete removal of the cap on the family quotient is now costed using the Cour des comptes (€4.5bn to €4.9bn), the same scale as the raising of the cap costed for the other candidates.Version 3
Flat-rate levy on capital (flat tax)Costing revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); property income subject to the flat-rate levy: the base by marginal rate is not published, the position remains not costed, reason clarified.Version 3
Inheritance and gift taxCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the abolition of inheritance tax in the direct line is costed at the children's share of the tax (53%, DG Trésor model published by the Cour des comptes), €8.5bn to €9.6bn; liberalised gifts remain not costed (partial costing).Version 4
VATCosting revised: most-recent-source rule. The programme, read on 12 October 2026, says the VAT question is « pas tranchée » [“not settled”]; the op-ed of May 2025 is earlier: the position is no longer costed (€22.2bn of revenue removed). The announced amount (about €25bn) is now cited in its own sense, a cut in charges on labour, not counted.Version 6
VATCosting revised: the reduced VAT rates (10%, 5.5% and 2.1%) are now parameters of the cost schedule, at the yield per point published by the DG Trésor, extrapolated and flagged beyond a one-point change (rule common to all). Position costed: €22.2bn of revenue at the centre (25.7 gross), by linear extrapolation, as an assumption; the amount cited (about €25bn) is taken up as an announcement.Version 5
VATCosting revised: the reason is clarified; the reduced rates are costed in the cost schedule only through one-point options, fixed amounts that cannot be extrapolated, and the only parameter, the standard rate, is not targeted. Position still not costed.Version 4
Corporate income taxCosting revised: lower bound of the coefficient corrected to the cost schedule (€58.5bn of IS (corporate income tax) forecast for 2027 ÷ 25 = €2.34bn per point, not 2.3); the central value, brought down to this bound, goes from €11.5bn to €11.7bn of decrease in revenue.Version 4
Corporate income taxCosting revised: the local share of 0 to 5 points is not counted, so the position is marked partial; the note acknowledges that the amount shown is the top of the range: under the acknowledged-bias rule, the central value goes to the lower bound of the coefficient (€12bn → €11.5bn of decrease in revenue), range unchanged.Version 3
Teachers' payCosting revised: single “net” convention for public staff (rule R9): at the centre, cost excluding all employer contributions paid to other general government bodies, brought back to earnings from active employment by the ratio from the 2024 PAP (about 1.15, editors' calculation); full employer cost as the upper bound. Central value 8.2 → €7.14bn; the position is now marked by the engine as an editors' assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4).Version 4
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: the position was not costed (“nothing to add”) even though its first series of six EPRs is that of the PPE3; it is now a status quo for this part, like François Ruffin's six EPR2s, partially (mini-reactors not costed).Version 4
Electricity prices, European marketCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); target energy price not costed, with the reason common to all candidates (editors' decision). Position still not costed.Version 3
Citizens' initiative referendum (RIC)Costing revised: RIC treated as an institutional reform outside the budget, a reason common to all candidates (decision of 18 October 2026).Version 4
Right of asylumCosting revised: same parameter and same reading as Bruno Retailleau and Nicolas Dupont-Aignan (common rule of 18 October 2026); applications processed in consulates abroad counted as fewer applications on French territory (demandes-asile parameter, −150,000 a year), central value at the lower bound of the cost per application (shifts to emergency accommodation and State medical aid not counted), instead of not costed.Version 3
State medical aid (Aide médicale de l'État)Costing revised: the position is now marked as an editors' assumption by the engine, as its coefficient is calculated by the editors (rule R4); the announced amount is no longer compared with the costing (editors' assumption). Amount unchanged.Version 4
State medical aid (Aide médicale de l'État)Costing revised: the announced amount (€0.7bn in savings) falls within the costing range (€0.2bn to €0.7bn); under the rule common to all, no gap is calculated any longer for an announcement within the range. Amount unchanged.Version 3

Jean-Luc Mélenchon 55 corrections

Net monthly SMIC (minimum wage)Costing revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 6
Net monthly SMIC (minimum wage)Costing revised: the part shared with the increase in the public sector pay index point, deducted from this amount, follows the new central value of the index point (€1.53bn excluding employer contributions paid to other general government bodies, “net” convention of 18 October 2026, common to all): €1.7bn not added instead of €2bn; €6.65bn counted instead of €6.33bn.Version 5
OvertimeCosting revised: ambiguous text, not costed, same rule as for Nicolas Dupont-Aignan on this lever (no reading prevails, no source read costs the gap with current law); the former costing (end of the reduction in employee contributions on overtime, €2.31bn of revenue) is cited in the reason.Version 4
OvertimeCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); « cotisations incluses » [“contributions included”] is read as the end of the reduction in employee contributions on overtime (cost-schedule option, €2.31bn), the other reading being cited.Version 3
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCosting revised: the RSA coefficient, taken from the 2020 order (2018 euros), is updated to the 2026 flat-rate amount (€0.17bn per point instead of 0.14; lower bound 0.15), a rule common to all: €14.72bn instead of €12.12bn. The line remains partial; the note cites the external costings of a guarantee at the poverty line (iFRAP 2022: €36bn; La France insoumise: about €25bn in 2021, €30bn in 2017), not counted.Version 5
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCosting revised: the note acknowledges that linear extrapolation does not count the entry of new households, and therefore underestimates the cost; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: when the note acknowledges a bias in the costing, the central value is brought to the bound that corrects it (upper bound for an underestimate), the central value is set at the upper bound of the coefficient, which has only one value (€0.14bn per point): amount unchanged, reason now shown on the line. Same treatment as Marine Tondelier's position.Version 4
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited fell outside the measured range of the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such; the guarantee is read as a flat-rate amount raised to the poverty line, as an assumption and in part.Version 3
Minimum income for under-25sCosting revised: the announced amount relates to the 2027 budget (amending finance act), a different year; it is now marked as such. Position still not costed.Version 5
Nurseries and childcareCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 4
Nurseries and childcareCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited fell outside the parameter's measured range; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such.Version 3
Old age and long-term careCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); 50,000 care home (Ehpad) places in 2032 × annual public operating cost of one place (care and APA (personalised autonomy allowance)): about €1.3bn per year (1.1 to 1.3), investment not counted.Version 3
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 7
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the note justified the uncosted part by the cost schedule's domain, which is no longer a ground (rule of 18 October 2026); it now states that only the first step, with no timetable for the next one, is costed. The announced amount, for the 2027 budget, concerns a different year: no gap calculated. Amount unchanged.Version 6
Contribution periodCosting revised: most-recent-source rule. The press conference of 14 October 2026 begins with the repeal of the 2023 reform and postpones the return to 60, which the 40 years of contributions go with, to the « reste du quinquennat » [“rest of the five-year term”], with no timetable; same reading as for the legal retirement age, the position is no longer costed (€7.21bn of spending removed, including the part shared with the age).Version 7
Contribution periodCosting revised: the note said that this cost and that of the legal retirement age do not add up; only the estimated shared part (€1.8bn, the effect of the contribution period already included in the age coefficient) is deducted from this cost, which the note now states. Amount unchanged.Version 6
Contribution periodCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited lay outside the measured domain of the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such, in part (pension reduction (décote) not costed).Version 5
Minimum pensionCosting revised: the central value had been set at the upper bound of the coefficient, which the cost schedule itself describes as an overestimate (all beneficiaries assumed to receive the full increase); it returns to the central value of the coefficient, as an assumption (rule common to all): €7.77bn instead of €11.54bn. The note cites the Institut Montaigne costing (€13.9bn by 2027 for a minimum contributory pension at a SMIC of €1,600) as an external benchmark, not counted.Version 5
Minimum pensionCosting revised: the note acknowledges that the costing underestimates the cost (the uprated SMIC, not costed (€1,600 net in the programme, €1,700 at the conference of 14 October 2026), would raise this minimum further, costed at the current SMIC); under the acknowledged-bias rule, common to all, the central value goes to the largest amount of the coefficient (€7.77bn → €11.54bn of spending), range unchanged.Version 4
Minimum pensionCosting revised: the position was not costed because the targeted increase fell outside the range of the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all, it is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such, with the same reading for Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Fabien Roussel (current net SMIC, the most cautious floor), as an assumption and in part.Version 3
Pension indexationCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); indexation rules are now costed with a common assumption (inflation of 1.75% a year, wage-price gap of 0.7 point from the COR (pensions advisory council)): 3.5 cumulative points from 2028 to 2032, about €8.2bn net per year in 2032 (7.3 to 10.4).Version 3
Flat-rate levy on capital (flat tax)Costing revised: the announced amount relates to the 2027 budget (amending finance act), a different year from the costing; it is now marked as such and no gap is calculated. Costed amount unchanged.Version 6
Tax and social security expendituresCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the tax expenditures cited are examined one by one: trimming with no rate, and two defined measures that fall under other levers. Position still not costed.Version 7
Tax and social security expendituresCosting revised: the announced amount relates to the 2027 budget (amending finance act), a different year; it is now marked as such. Position still not costed.Version 6
Tax and social security fraudCosting revised: the announced amount relates to the 2027 budget (amending finance act), a different year; it is now marked as such. Position still not costed.Version 5
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Costing revised: Zucman tax reinstated (decision of 18 October 2026, which replaces the one of the same day): the 2% minimum tax on assets of more than €100m is again costed and added, at the upper end of the estimates (€15bn to €25bn, the estimate of its proponents, which the administration has not simulated). The position again counts the minimum tax in addition to the return of the ISF; the announced amount (€25bn), which covers these two taxes in a full year, is again compared with the costing.Version 7
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Costing revised: the Zucman tax is no longer added for any candidate (rule of 18 October 2026): its yield, estimated by its proponents at between €15bn and €25bn, is not costed by any administration. Only the return of the ISF is still counted; the announced amount, which includes the Zucman tax, now covers a different scope.Version 6
Inheritance and gift taxCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the 100% levy above €12m is costed on the CAE (Council of Economic Analysis) distribution of inheritances (€3.5bn to €9bn, upper bound Institut Montaigne), net of the allowance raised to €150,000 (cost of €0.75bn); assumption and partial costing.Version 6
Inheritance and gift taxCosting revised: the announced amount relates to the 2027 budget (amending finance act), a different year; it is now marked as such. Position still not costed.Version 5
Corporate income taxCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the progressive tax is costed on its named bound, 33% for large companies (share of large companies in IS (corporate income tax), DGFiP), the intermediate brackets remaining not costed.Version 6
Corporate income taxCosting revised: the announced amount relates to the 2027 budget (amending finance act), a different year; it is now marked as such. Position still not costed.Version 5
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCosting revised: the 15% rate « adopté en commission des finances » [“adopted in the finance committee”] cited is that of amendment no. I-CF618 to the budget bill for 2027 (National Assembly, https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/17/amendements/3210A/CION_FIN/CF618), which raises the digital services tax to 15% and its worldwide turnover threshold to €2bn: the same scheme as the amendment co-signed by Gabriel Attal and Olivier Becht. Same treatment: threshold not modelled, stated in the note, partial costing maintained; as the amount is acknowledged to be overestimated, the central value is brought down to the lower bound of the coefficient (yield of one point according to the revised forecast for 2026), under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: when the note acknowledges a bias in the costing, the central value is brought to the bound that corrects it: €3.6bn instead of €3.9bn.Version 4
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCosting revised: the cost schedule now costs the rate of the digital services tax (parameter added on 18 October 2026, coefficient calculated by the editors); the position, previously not costed, is now costed at the rate cited, as an assumption and in part (adjustment of profits not costed); the announced amount, for the whole and for 2027, covers a different scope.Version 3
Financial transaction taxCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the tax « adoptée en commission des finances » [“adopted in the finance committee”] is read as LFI's amendment no. I-CF780 to the PLF (budget bill) 2027 (0.5% and widened base), costed at the rate only on the current base (€0.6bn, extrapolated); assumption and partial costing.Version 4
Financial transaction taxCosting revised: the reason said that the cost schedule only costs the abolition of the tax; since 18 October 2026 it also costs its rate, which the quote does not give. The announced amount, for the 2027 budget, is marked as relating to a different year. Position still not costed.Version 3
State grants to local authoritiesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); indexation of the municipalities' DGF (general operating grant) to inflation costed with the common inflation assumption (cost-schedule option, municipalities' 2025 DGF according to the Government), instead of “not costed”.Version 3
Pupils per class, primaryCosting revised: single « net » convention for public staff (rule R9): at the centre, cost excluding all employer contributions paid to other general government bodies, converted to pay for active staff using the ratio from the PAP 2024 (about 1.15, editors’ calculation); full employer cost as upper bound. Central value €1.2bn → €1.05bn.Version 3
Public hospitalsCosting revised: the announced amount relates to the 2027 budget (amending finance act), a different year from the costing; it is now marked as such and no gap is calculated. Costed amount unchanged.Version 5
Social housingCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 3
Personal housing benefits (APL)Costing revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 5
Emergency shelterCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); €3bn plan taken as an envelope (enveloppe-hebergement parameter), instead of not costed.Version 6
Emergency shelterCosting revised: the announced amount relates to the 2027 budget (amending finance act), a different year; it is now marked as such. Position still not costed.Version 5
Violence against women and childrenCosting revised: the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all, reduces a total amount of appropriations to the gap with existing spending (€1.5bn); the quote here presents the €5bn as an increase, as opposed to the « socle existant » [“existing base”] of €1.5bn, which « n'est pas une augmentation » [“is not an increase”]: reading checked, amount unchanged (+€5bn), the note says so.Version 4
Violence against women and childrenCosting revised: the announced amount relates to the 2027 budget (amending finance act), a different year from the costing; it is now marked as such and no gap is calculated. Costed amount unchanged.Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 7
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: under the « net » convention of 18 October 2026, common to all public staff levers, the cost of one public sector pay index point is counted at the centre excluding employer contributions paid to other general government bodies (€1.53bn), the full employer cost (€2.27bn) becoming the upper bound: €15.3bn (14.7 to 22.7) instead of €22.7bn. The share common with the SMIC increase, removed from the latter, is recalculated accordingly.Version 6
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the announced amount relates to the 2027 budget (amending finance act), a different year from the costing; it is now marked as such and no gap is calculated. Costed amount unchanged.Version 5
Energy renovations per yearCosting revised: the text says « isolés » [“insulated”], neither « globale » [“comprehensive”] nor « d'ampleur » [“major”], and the note acknowledges that insulation alone costs less than a major renovation; the central value is brought down to the lower bound of the coefficient (average aid for a major renovation in a jointly owned building, €11,800), under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: €7.3bn instead of €15.8bn (range unchanged, 7.3 to 21.9).Version 4
Energy renovations per yearCosting revised: the position was not costed whereas the renovation targets of Marine Tondelier, Fabien Roussel and François Ruffin are, by reading their renovations as major renovations; same reading here, at the floor of « au moins 700 000 » [“at least 700,000”], as an assumption and in part.Version 3
Adaptation to climate changeCosting revised: the announced amount relates to the 2027 budget (amending finance act), a different year from the costing; it is now marked as such and no gap is calculated. Costed amount unchanged.Version 3
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 3
Electricity prices, European marketCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); target energy price not costed, with the reason common to all candidates (editors' decision). Position still not costed.Version 5
Additional public investment, per yearCosting revised: savings plan whose public spending share is not stated, not costed (common rule, the same for Fabien Roussel; Gabriel Attal, who states the public share of his plan, remains costed), instead of a status quo counted at zero; the “loans with no effect on the balance” reading is cited in the reason.Version 7
Additional public investment, per yearCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); savings channelled into loans, read as having no effect on the balance (same low reading as for the loans of the public banking hub): position counted at zero.Version 6
Motorway concessionsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); renationalisation, with no date, is read as taking over the concessions when they expire (cost-schedule option, zero static cost), the reversal of past increases remaining not costed for lack of a reference year.Version 3
Citizens' initiative referendum (RIC)Costing revised: RIC treated as an institutional reform outside the budget, a reason common to all candidates (decision of 18 October 2026).Version 3

Édouard Philippe 31 corrections

Unemployment, max. benefit durationCosting revised: the note also points out that negotiated terminations (ruptures conventionnelles) have already been compensated for at most 15 months since 1 September 2026 (gain overestimated, as for Gabriel Attal and Bruno Retailleau); no source makes it possible to isolate this share, nor that of 50 to 54-year-olds: nothing is removed. Amount unchanged.Version 5
Unemployment, max. benefit durationCosting revised: as the gain is acknowledged as overestimated (50 to 54-year-olds are counted), the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all, takes the lower bound as the centre, now displayed on the line; for this parameter, the central value (€0.7bn per month) is already the lower bound of the range. Amount unchanged.Version 4
Unemployment, max. benefit durationCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited lay outside the measured domain of the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such; the age threshold of 50, different from that of current law, is flagged (assumption, partial costing).Version 3
Statutory working timeSource revised: the quote assembled fragments taken up by the franceinfo article; it is now taken from the programme itself (video on the candidate’s YouTube channel, 8 min 18 s). The means, which the summary said was unspecified, is given just before (7 min 41 s): « dès lors que dans une entreprise, après une discussion au sein de l'entreprise, on décide de travailler plus longtemps » [“as soon as, in a company, after a discussion within the company, it is decided to work longer”], these hours would be « progressivement dégagée[s] des cotisations sociales et de l'impôt sur le revenu » [“gradually freed from social contributions and income tax”]; the summary says so (“Overtime” position). Position put back under checking.Version 4
Family allowancesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); cost benchmarks without tapering (per family and per child) cited in the reason; position still not costed (tapering not described).Version 5
Family allowancesSource revised: the quote was mostly the sentence of the franceinfo journalist (« Concrètement, le maire du Havre propose… » [“In concrete terms, the mayor of Le Havre proposes…”]), and the only fragment in quotation marks, « ensuite dégressive avec l'impôt sur le revenu » [“then tapering with income tax”], did not reproduce his words; it is now taken from the programme itself (video on the candidate’s YouTube channel, 9 min 29 s): the allowance is « dégressi[ve] avec le revenu » [“taper[ing] with income”]. The campaign website (« Trois principales annonces d'Édouard Philippe à l'Heure de vérité ») gives it « à coût constant » [“at constant cost”]; the reason for not costing cites this. Position put back under checking; still not costed.Version 3
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: as the contribution period is now costed at the horizon of the announced timetable (176 quarters, €4bn), the gain from the age (€4.7bn) becomes the higher of the two: it is counted in full, the common share (around €0.4bn) being removed from that of the contribution period. Cnav shares checked: they relate to two increases at the pace of one quarter per generation, as here.Version 6
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the overlap with the contribution period, also raised, no longer keeps only the higher of the two gains; the share common to both increases is measured from Cnav data (report annexed to the PLFRSS 2023, table 5: 8% of the gain from the age, 23% of that from the contribution period) and removed from the smaller one. The gain from the age, until now displayed without being added, is now counted, minus around €0.4bn of common share (rule common to all); the note says so.Version 5
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the option « 65 ans au rythme actuel » [“65 at the current pace”] (Cour des comptes, €4.7bn in 2035), added to the cost schedule on 18 October 2026, corresponds to the pace he announces; it replaces the accelerated rise (€8.4bn), which overestimated his gain.Version 4
Contribution periodCosting revised: the source gives a timetable (« en moins de dix ans » [“in less than ten years”]); at the pace of one quarter per generation, only the first four quarters (176) have an effect within the horizon. The position is costed as the Cour des comptes’ « 176 trimestres » scenario (tables no. 7 and 12): gain of €4bn at the centre (4 to 5.2) instead of €8bn (8 to 10.4), without extrapolation; quarters 177 to 180 are not costed (partial). Same reading of the timetable as for the candidate’s legal retirement age.Version 6
Contribution periodCosting revised: the note acknowledges that the coefficient for the extension, from 2035, slightly overstates the 2032 gain; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: when the note acknowledges a bias in the costing, the central value is brought to the bound that corrects it (lower bound for an overestimate); here, the lower bound of the coefficient (€1bn per quarter): gain of €8bn before overlap with the legal retirement age, instead of 10.4. Same treatment as Éric Zemmour’s position.Version 5
Contribution periodCosting revised: the extension is now costed at the coefficient the Cour des comptes gives for an increase (€5.2bn in 2035 for four more quarters, i.e. €1.3bn per quarter) and no longer at that for a decrease (€0.75bn): €10.4bn (8 to 10.4) instead of €6bn, by linear extrapolation beyond 176 quarters. The gain from the legal retirement age is now added, minus the share common to both increases measured from Cnav data (rule common to all).Version 4
Contribution periodCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited lay outside the measured domain of the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such; 45 years read as the period ultimately required, as an assumption.Version 3
Long careersSource revised: the quote was LCP’s report, which rephrased the video; it is now taken from the video itself, on the candidate’s YouTube channel (9 min 11 s). Direction unchanged; position put back under checking.Version 4
Funded shareCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); first payment of €500 × 773,000 first-time leavers from the education system per year (Céreq): about €0.39bn per year; generalised collective funded pensions remain not costed.Version 5
Income tax scaleCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the tax reduction of up to €3,000 for three years after a birth is costed on the DGFiP deciles of RFR (reference taxable income) per share and Insee births (€1.7bn at most, assumption), against €3bn announced.Version 6
Income tax scaleSource revised: the quote, accurate but cut by the franceinfo article, is now taken from the programme itself (video on the candidate’s YouTube channel, 9 min 48 s), with the continuation that defines the measure: no income tax for the three years following the birth for the middle classes (« Les 4e, 5e, 6e déciles et peut-être le début du 7e » [“The 4th, 5th, 6th deciles and perhaps the start of the 7th”]), a reduction of around €3,000 above that. The summary says so. Position put back under checking; still not costed.Version 4
Public aid to businessesCosting revised: a pure amount with no named measure is not costed (decision 1 of 18 October 2026, common rule); the €50bn reduction in aid to businesses, taken until now at the candidate's amount (€50bn of savings a year), reverts to not costed, the amount still being cited next to the total, like the cut in production taxes that it funds.Version 5
Public aid to businessesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); decision applied: the €50bn reduction in aid to businesses is taken at the candidate's amount, read as per year, like the cut in production taxes that it funds (both sides treated together).Version 4
Production taxesCosting revised: a pure amount of tax cuts with no named instrument is not costed (decision 1 of 18 October 2026, common rule, applied in the same way to Marine Le Pen's €20bn and to David Lisnard's €40bn beyond the taxes they name); the €50bn cut in production taxes, taken until now at the candidate's amount (€50bn a year), reverts to not costed, the amount still being cited next to the total; its counterpart (€50bn less in subsidies) is treated in the same way.Version 6
Production taxesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); decision applied: the €50bn cut in production taxes is taken at the candidate's amount, read as per year, like its counterpart of €50bn less in subsidies (both sides treated together).Version 5
Teachers' payCosting revised: single “net” convention for public staff (rule R9): at the centre, cost excluding all employer contributions paid to other general government bodies, brought back to earnings from active employment by the ratio from the 2024 PAP (about 1.15, editors' calculation); full employer cost as the upper bound. Central value 8.2 → €7.14bn; the position is now marked by the engine as an editors' assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4).Version 4
Access to higher educationSource revised: « Parcoursup ne marche pas » [“Parcoursup doesn’t work”] was the caption of a video published by franceinfo, not his words; the quote is now taken from the programme itself (video on the candidate’s YouTube channel, 31 min 32 s), where he agrees with upper secondary pupils: Parcoursup « ne marche pas comme ça devrait » [“doesn’t work as it should”]. Direction unchanged; position put back under checking.Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsSource revised: the quote was the sentence of the franceinfo journalist; it is now taken from the programme itself (video on the candidate’s YouTube channel, 25 min 05 s), where the candidate himself gives the 750,000 retirements and the replacement of « 2 sur 3 » [“2 out of 3”]. The campaign website, modified since, writes « plus de 250 000 postes » [“more than 250,000 posts”]: costed at 250,000, the most cautious value, already marked partial. Amount unchanged; position put back under checking.Version 4
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited lay outside the measured domain of the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such: around 250,000 staff, as an assumption and in part.Version 3
Adaptation to climate changeCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the single fund of €2bn a year is now costed as the difference from the appropriations of the Barnier fund and the Fonds vert in the PLF 2027, taken from the annual performance plan.Version 6
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 7
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: since the amount is acknowledged to be overestimated beyond the six EPR2s of the PPE3, the following ones being disbursed later than the coefficient assumes, the central value is brought down to the lower bound of the coefficient (€0.61bn per reactor, EDF estimate of December 2025, 60% financed by a State loan paid out over 12 years), under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: €4.9bn instead of 5.8 (range unchanged, 4.9 to 9.6). State loan, counted in the debt, separately from the balance.Version 6
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited fell outside the parameter's measured range; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such.Version 5
Right of asylumCosting revised: rule common to the four positions costed by the gain per asylum application (Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, Bruno Retailleau, David Lisnard, Édouard Philippe, 18 October 2026): the note acknowledges that the shifts to emergency accommodation and to State medical aid (aide médicale de l'État) are not counted, so the gain is overestimated; central value brought down to the lower bound of the cost per application (« central » [“central”] rule).Version 5
Right of asylumCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); suspension in Mayotte and Guyane costed on the 2025 applications (demandes-asile parameter), instead of not costed.Version 4

Bruno Retailleau 48 corrections

Reductions in social contributions on low wagesCosting revised: a pure amount of contribution cuts with no named instrument is not costed (decision 1 of 18 October 2026, common rule, like Marine Le Pen's €20bn and David Lisnard's €40bn); the business half (€15bn, taken until now) is no longer counted, only the employee half, calculated per person (€10.5bn), remains: €10.5bn instead of €25.5bn, partial costing.Version 6
Reductions in social contributions on low wagesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the employee half is costed on its per-person rule, €500 net a year per private-sector employee (“uniform net gain per employee” parameter, €10.5bn), the business half remains taken at €15bn: €25.5bn instead of the €30bn taken until now.Version 5
In-work benefit (prime d'activité)Costing revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); schedule of the incentive income specified (Travail gagnant booklet); position still not costed (microsimulation needed).Version 4
Profit sharing (participation, intéressement)Costing revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the abolition of the employer contribution on free shares and stock options is costed on its base (about €1.5bn), the rest of employee share ownership remaining not costed.Version 5
Unemployment, work period required to qualify for benefitsCosting revised: the same measure calls for applying the June 2024 rules, whose eligibility condition (8 months of work in the last 20 months) concerns the opening of entitlements; quotation extended to this sentence on the same page, summary aligned. The required work period is now costed at 8 months (and no longer at 9 months, the value for recharging alone, which the coefficient, valid for opening and recharging together, overestimated); recharging raised to 9 or 12 months and the 20-month reference period are not costed. Assumption, partial costing.Version 6
Unemployment, work period required to qualify for benefitsCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited fell outside the measured range of the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such; « neuf ou douze mois » [“nine or twelve months”] is costed at the more cautious value, as an assumption and in part.Version 5
Unemployment, max. benefit durationCosting revised: the position was not costed because the June 2024 rules were costed by the Unédic against the law at that time; the repeals of the 2019-2021 reform are costed for other candidates with a 2021 Unédic estimate, which also predates current law. Same treatment here: the 15-month maximum duration of the June 2024 rules is costed using the duration parameter (18 months today), by flagged linear extrapolation, as an assumption and in part (negotiated terminations (rupture conventionnelle) limited to six months and capped, rules for older workers not costed); as the gain is acknowledged to be overestimated, the lower bound is used at the centre (rule of 18 October 2026, common to all), here equal to the central value (€0.7bn per month).Version 4
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCosting revised: the RSA coefficient, taken from the 2020 order (2018 euros), is updated to the 2026 flat-rate amount (€0.17bn per point instead of 0.14; lower bound 0.15), a rule common to all: gain of €2.65bn instead of 2.18 (2.34 to 2.65). Line still partial.Version 6
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCosting revised: the reason said that a decrease in the flat-rate amount falls outside the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all, a value outside the measured range is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such, downwards as well as upwards. The flat-rate amount is costed at €550 a month, the more cautious of the two amounts cited (−15.6%), as an assumption and in part; the announced gain (€2bn), which covers the whole incentive income, is flagged as having a different scope.Version 5
Family allowancesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); family income costed net of the family allowances and the complément familial that are named (revenu-familial-240 option), instead of not costed.Version 4
Legal retirement ageSource revised: the position cited remarks made on LCI on 22 September 2026, reported in an LCP news dispatch, and gave the expected savings according to LCP (€40bn cumulative over five years) and Public Sénat (€12bn in the plan of 12 October 2026). It is now taken from the candidate's programme, measure no. 108 of avecretailleau.fr (updated on 15 October 2026), which costs the age reform at nearly €9bn in 2032; the €12bn is cited from the candidate's press fact sheets (sheet no. 6), which add long careers to it. Value and direction unchanged; position still not costed.Version 5
Contribution periodSource revised: the quotation mixed a sentence by the LCP journalist (« le départ à taux plein automatique serait fixé à 65 ans et non à 67 » [“automatic full-rate retirement would be set at 65 and not at 67”]) with remarks by the candidate; it is replaced by the candidate's programme, measure no. 109 of avecretailleau.fr (updated on 15 October 2026). Content unchanged; the contribution period still sets the amount of the pension (measure no. 108). Position still not costed.Version 4
Long careersSource revised: the quotation was a sentence by the LCP journalist (« les personnes ayant commencé à travailler quand elles étaient jeunes […] pourraient partir à taux plein à 63 ans » [“people who started working when they were young […] could retire on a full pension at 63”]); it is replaced by the candidate's programme, measure no. 110 of avecretailleau.fr (updated on 15 October 2026). The same programme allows no retirement before 63 except for disability, invalidity and incapacity (press fact sheets of 12 October 2026, sheet no. 6) and entrusts the long-career envelope to the sectors (measure no. 112): early retirement for long careers, possible from 58 today, is no longer possible before 63; direction corrected (other → decrease), summary aligned. Position still not costed.Version 3
Arduous workSource revised: the quotation was a sentence by the LCP journalist (« prendrait en compte […] selon des dispositifs déjà en vigueur » [“would take into account […] according to schemes already in force”]); it is replaced by the candidate's programme, measure no. 112 of avecretailleau.fr (updated on 15 October 2026), a more recent and different source: arduous work is entrusted to the sectors, which finance end-of-career arrangements from 63 (part-time work, retraining, buying back the pension reduction) out of the long-career envelope; people unfit for work and invalids keep the full rate at 62, disabled workers early retirement from 55. Direction corrected (unchanged → other); costing revised: as the status quo is no longer the reading of the text, the position is no longer costed.Version 3
Special pension schemes, points-based systemSource revised: the quotation was a sentence by the Public Sénat journalist (« Le reste provient de l’introduction d’une part de capitalisation […] ou encore de l’extinction des derniers régimes spéciaux » [“The rest comes from the introduction of a funded component […] or from the phasing out of the last special pension schemes”]); it is replaced by the candidate's press fact sheets (12 October 2026, sheet no. 6, published on avecretailleau.fr), which cost the alignment with Agirc-Arrco (€7.2bn) and the effects of the closure of the special pension schemes decided in 2023 (€3.0bn). Summary and announced amount aligned; position still not costed.Version 3
Funded shareSource revised: the position cited remarks by the candidate on LCI (22 September 2026) reported by LCP, in which the funding was only an option; the candidate's most recent source, measure no. 113 of avecretailleau.fr (updated on 15 October 2026), settles it: contribution of 1% of salary up to the ceiling, half employee, half employer (€6bn in 2032), on top of pay-as-you-go contributions, which do not change; additional contribution on bonuses doubled in the civil service. Quotation, summary and reason aligned; position still not costed.Version 4
Family quotientCosting revised: decision applied, calculated yield (18 October 2026), rule common to any named revenue measure; the abolition of the family quotient, which measure no. 75 names among the schemes abolished, is costed by the cost-schedule option (abolition of the family quotient in the strict sense, €12.5bn to €16.5bn of revenue), limited to the children's share (central value brought down to the lower bound, €12.5bn, the upper bound also covering the specific half-shares), instead of not costed; the age supplement remains counted at the family allowances position.Version 4
Tax and social security fraudSource revised: the quotation was a sentence by the Public Sénat journalist (« la lutte contre la fraude fiscale et sociale, à hauteur de 5 milliards d'euros » [“the fight against tax and social fraud, to the tune of 5 billion euros”]); it is replaced by the candidate's press fact sheets (12 October 2026, published on avecretailleau.fr), where the €5bn covers only tax fraud and fraud on public aid (sheet no. 5, measure no. 120) and is added to €4bn of social fraud (sheet no. 10): announced amount €9bn instead of 5, summary aligned. Position still not costed.Version 3
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Source revised: the quotation was a sentence by the Public Sénat journalist (« Gérard Larcher et Bruno Retailleau se sont tous les deux prononcés contre la taxe Zucman » [“Gérard Larcher and Bruno Retailleau have both come out against the Zucman tax”]), without the candidate's words. No statement by the candidate quoted word for word on this tax has been found; the position is now taken from a text by the party he leads, published on republicains.fr on 15 October 2025, which lists the introduction of the Zucman tax among the left's « chantages » [“blackmail”] to be fought. Direction and costing unchanged (status quo).Version 3
Production taxesCosting revised: the announced amount includes the overhaul of the forfait social, outside this lever: it is now flagged as having a different scope. Costed amount unchanged.Version 4
Public deficit targeted for 2032Source revised: the quotation was a sentence by the LCP journalist (« Ce dernier permettrait, selon lui, de passer sous la barre des 3% dès 2031… » [“According to him, this would make it possible to fall below the 3% mark from 2031…”]); it is replaced by the candidate's programme, measure no. 117 of avecretailleau.fr (updated on 15 October 2026), which also gives the 2031 deficit (2.8%). The mention « sans augmentation d'impôts » [“without tax increases”], absent from this measure, is removed from the summary. Value unchanged (2.2%).Version 3
Announced savingsSource revised: the quotation was the LCP report (« un plan d'économies de 197 milliards d'euros sur cinq ans… » [“a savings plan of 197 billion euros over five years…”]), a rewording by the journalist, and the announced amount cited two figures from Public Sénat (€56bn and €51bn). The position is now taken from the candidate's programme, measure no. 116 of avecretailleau.fr (updated on 15 October 2026), and from his press fact sheets of 12 October 2026: the €197bn is the level of savings in 2032, not a cumulative total over five years; the split between State, social security and local authorities (€96bn, €91bn, €10bn) is that of the fact sheets; Public Sénat's €56bn does not appear in them (€51bn given back, plus €14bn described as self-financed). Summary aligned; position still not costed.Version 4
Announced savingsCorrected and validated by the editors: the working note « chiffre à confirmer » [“figure to be confirmed”] is removed from the announced amount; the two figures from Public Sénat (€56bn and €51bn) remain cited. Costing unchanged.Version 3
Handling of the debtSource revised: the quotation was a sentence by the Public Sénat journalist (« L'ancien ministre de l'Intérieur s'engage à assurer un excédent primaire… » [“The former Interior Minister commits to ensuring a primary surplus…”]); it is replaced by the candidate's programme, measure no. 117 of avecretailleau.fr (updated on 15 October 2026), which adds the peak in debt in 2030 (123.8% of GDP according to his press fact sheets of 12 October 2026, sheet no. 13). Summary aligned; direction unchanged.Version 3
Fiscal rulesSource revised: the quotation was a sentence by the Public Sénat journalist (« Le texte prévoit des lois-cadres… » [“The text provides for framework laws…”]); it is replaced by the candidate's programme, measure no. 115 of avecretailleau.fr (updated on 15 October 2026), which specifies the route chosen: the referendum on the constitutional bill adopted by both chambers on 13 July 2011. Summary aligned; direction unchanged.Version 3
Local taxationCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the €9,000 payment per new home is costed on the number of homes started in 2025 (274,611, SDES), €2.47bn, counted as a grant (editors' assumption).Version 3
State grants to local authoritiesSource revised: the quotation was a sentence by the LCP journalist (« Il attend aussi des collectivités un effort de dix milliards d'euros » [“He also expects an effort of ten billion euros from local authorities”]); it is replaced by the candidate's press fact sheets (12 October 2026, sheet no. 12, published on avecretailleau.fr). The effort concerns the operating expenditure of local authorities, through a commitment to control it and convergence towards a standard cost, with no reduction in State transfers announced: direction corrected (decrease → other), summary aligned. Position still not costed.Version 3
Teachers' payCosting revised: single “net” convention for public staff (rule R9): at the centre, cost excluding all employer contributions paid to other general government bodies, related to activity pay by the ratio from the 2024 PAP (around 1.15, editors' calculation); full employer cost as the upper bound. Central value 1.85 → €1.61bn.Version 5
Teachers' payCosting revised: the position was not costed for lack of a breakdown of teachers by career stage; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all, it is costed at the floor of the amounts cited (€135 net), as an assumption and in part, like Gabriel Attal's increase (€200 for all, up to €500).Version 4
University tuition feesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); end of exemptions costed on the theoretical revenue from differentiated fees (Cour des comptes) and the cap in the decree of May 2026, instead of not costed.Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsSource revised: the quotation was a sentence by the Public Sénat journalist (« Le candidat s’engage sur le non-remplacement à la retraite de 400 000 agents publics… » [“The candidate commits to not replacing 400,000 public employees on retirement…”]); it is replaced by the candidate's programme, measure no. 118 of avecretailleau.fr (updated on 15 October 2026), and his press fact sheets of 12 October 2026 (sheet no. 3), which give the basis for the €25bn: €62,000 including employer charges per employee, i.e. the full employer cost. Content and costed amount unchanged.Version 8
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the position is now marked as an editors' assumption by the engine, as its coefficient is calculated by the editors (rule R4); the announced amount is no longer compared with the costing (editors' assumption). Amount unchanged.Version 7
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited fell outside the parameter's measured range; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such.Version 6
Public broadcastingSource revised: the quotation was a sentence by the Public Sénat journalist (« de gros efforts dans la culture et l'audiovisuel public » [“major efforts in culture and public broadcasting”]); it is replaced by the candidate's press fact sheets (12 October 2026, sheet no. 4, published on avecretailleau.fr), which put the « Culture et médias » line at €2.6bn on the basis of the public broadcasting grant and the Pass Culture. Summary aligned; position still not costed.Version 3
Energy renovations per yearSource revised: the quotation was a sentence by the Public Sénat journalist (« la fin du service national universel (SNU) ou encore de MaPrimeRénov' » [“the end of the universal national service (SNU) or of MaPrimeRénov'”]); it is replaced by the candidate's press fact sheets (12 October 2026, published on avecretailleau.fr): MaPrimeRénov' is listed among the « dispositifs sans résultat démontré » [“schemes without proven results”] that are abolished, for €2bn in 2032 (sheet no. 4), and a « Relais de MaPrimeRénov’ » [“MaPrimeRénov’ relay”] is given back to households together with the VAT on energy savings certificates, €3bn together (sheet no. 14). This relay, with no form or amount of its own, is not deducted: as the gain is acknowledged to be overestimated, the lower bound is used at the centre (rule of 18 October 2026, common to all): €1.10bn instead of 2.38 (range 1.10 to 3.29 unchanged). Editors' assumption, partial costing.Version 4
Energy renovations per yearCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 3
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: since the amount is acknowledged to be overestimated beyond the six EPR2s of the PPE3, the following ones being disbursed later than the coefficient assumes, the central value is brought down to the lower bound of the coefficient (€0.61bn per reactor, EDF estimate of December 2025, 60% financed by a State loan paid out over 12 years), under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: €4.9bn instead of 5.8 (range unchanged, 4.9 to 9.6). State loan, counted in the debt, separately from the balance.Version 5
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited fell outside the measured range of the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such; the condition (satisfactory progress on the first six) is read as met, as an assumption.Version 4
Wind and solarCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); end of aid for future photovoltaic installations, existing contracts honoured: costed by the TWh that would no longer be supported in 2032 according to the trajectory of the PPE3 (multi-year energy programme), at the cost-schedule coefficient (same method as for any volume target).Version 4
Electricity prices, European marketCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); target energy price not costed, with the reason common to all candidates (editors' decision). Position still not costed.Version 3
Industrial aid and reshoringCosting revised: the reason given for not costing (amount “below the half-step” of the parameter) is not a costing rule. Like other announced amounts for an envelope, the €400m a year from the State and the regions are taken as they stand (€0.4bn of new spending), as an assumption (new appropriations) and in part (tax over-depreciation not costed); the €200m of European funds are not counted.Version 5
Voting system for legislative electionsSource revised: the quotation was a sentence by the Public Sénat journalist (« refuse toujours de « porter » une telle réforme » [“still refuses to ‘carry’ such a reform”]), in which only one word came from the candidate; it is replaced by his remarks of the same day quoted word for word, in quotation marks, by Public Sénat on 3 June 2025 (« L’éparpillement auquel le mode de scrutin (proportionnel) conduirait est en réalité profondément déstabilisant pour le pays » [“The fragmentation to which the (proportional) voting system would lead is in reality deeply destabilising for the country”]; the parenthesis is the journalist's). The political bureau of Les Républicains had reaffirmed on 28 May 2025 its « ferme opposition à l’introduction de la proportionnelle » [“firm opposition to the introduction of proportional representation”] (republicains.fr). Direction unchanged.Version 3
Citizens' initiative referendum (RIC)Costing revised: RIC treated as an institutional reform outside the budget, a reason common to all candidates (decision of 18 October 2026).Version 4
Right of asylumCosting revised: rule common to the four positions costed by the gain per asylum application (Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, Bruno Retailleau, David Lisnard, Édouard Philippe, 18 October 2026): the note acknowledges that the shifts to emergency accommodation and to State medical aid (aide médicale de l'État) are not counted, so the gain is overestimated; central value brought down to the lower bound of the cost per application (« central » [“central”] rule).Version 6
Right of asylumCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); examination outside the borders read as fewer applications on French territory (demandes-asile parameter), instead of not costed.Version 5
Right of asylumSource revised: the quotation was a sentence by the Public Sénat journalist (« Sans elle, impossible d’imposer cinq années de séjour… » [“Without it, impossible to impose five years of residence…”]), which gave €4.5bn for asylum and the five-year condition together; it is replaced by the candidate's press fact sheets (12 October 2026, sheet no. 9, published on avecretailleau.fr), which cost asylum separately: €0.9bn (€3.6bn for the five-year condition). Announced amount now specific to asylum; position still not costed.Version 3
State medical aid (Aide médicale de l'État)Source revised: the position was based on an Economie Matin article of January 2025 (« Retailleau propose de remplacer l'AME par une aide d'urgence… » [“Retailleau proposes replacing the AME with emergency aid…”], a sentence by the journalist); it is now taken from the candidate's press fact sheets (12 October 2026, sheet no. 9, published on avecretailleau.fr), a more recent source: the AME is « réduite aux soins essentiels et aux mineurs » [“reduced to essential care and to minors”], not replaced. Direction corrected (abolition → decrease); same option in the cost schedule, read as an assumption; the announced amount (€0.7bn) is now cited. Costed amount unchanged.Version 4
State medical aid (Aide médicale de l'État)Costing revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 3

Fabien Roussel 37 corrections

Net monthly SMIC (minimum wage)Costing revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 5
Net monthly SMIC (minimum wage)Costing revised: the note placed the range of the cost schedule at €1,700 net; it stops at €1,691 net, and the candidate's amount is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such.Version 4
Unemployment, work period required to qualify for benefitsCosting revised: the repeal of the unemployment insurance reforms is now encoded as with Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Marine Tondelier: the eligibility condition is counted in the repeal of the 2019-2021 reform (“Benefit amount and tapering” lever), no longer here.Version 3
Unemployment, max. benefit durationCosting revised: the note now says that the 2019-2021 reform is costed under the “Benefit amount and tapering” lever, as with Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Marine Tondelier. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the note states the contribution period assumption used (the quote does not call for the 40 years of contributions: current-law period, not costed), specifies that the upper bound of the coefficient (€9bn per year of age), used for the central value, is a calculation by the editors (€27bn ÷ 3, Institut Montaigne 2022) and cites the Institut Montaigne's 2024 benchmark (€58bn for a broader package, of which €35.2bn for age and contribution period). Amount unchanged.Version 6
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the note acknowledges that linear extrapolation below 62 underestimates the cost; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all (when the note acknowledges a bias in the costing, the central value is moved to the bound that corrects it: upper bound for an underestimate), the central value is raised to the upper bound of the coefficient (€9bn per year of age): €33.75bn instead of €27.38bn (range unchanged, €21.75bn to €33.75bn). Same treatment as François Ruffin's position.Version 5
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: retirement at 60 was costed at 62, a floor taken from another statement; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all, a value cited is costed at that value, here by linear extrapolation flagged as such (assumption: current-law contribution period).Version 4
Minimum pensionCosting revised: the central value had been set at the upper bound of the coefficient, which the cost schedule itself describes as an overestimate (all beneficiaries assumed to receive the full increase); it returns to the central value of the coefficient, as an assumption (rule common to all): €7.77bn instead of €11.54bn. The note cites the Institut Montaigne costing (€13.9bn by 2027 for a minimum contributory pension at a SMIC of €1,600) as an external benchmark, not counted.Version 6
Minimum pensionCosting revised: the note acknowledges that the costing underestimates the cost (the SMIC at €1,700 net targeted in the same speech, not costed, would raise this minimum further, costed at the current SMIC); under the acknowledged-bias rule, common to all, the central value goes to the highest amount of the coefficient (€7.77bn → €11.54bn of spending), range unchanged.Version 5
Minimum pensionCosting revised: the position was not costed because the targeted increase fell outside the range of the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all, it is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such, with the same reading for Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Fabien Roussel (current net SMIC, the most cautious floor), as an assumption and in part.Version 4
Tax and social security fraudSource revised: the quote came from LCP's report, whose cut « (...) » omitted a condition; it is now taken from the programme itself (video on TF1 INFO's YouTube channel, 3 min 28 s): community service is aimed only at « les moins pires » [“the least bad”], and the candidate also wants to abolish the negotiation of fines, « un privilège de classe » [“a class privilege”]. The summary says so. Position put back to being checked; still not costed.Version 3
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Costing revised: Zucman tax reinstated (decision of 18 October 2026): the 2% minimum tax on assets over €100m is costed and added, at the upper end of the estimates (€15bn to €25bn, an estimate by its proponents, which the administration has not simulated). Fabien Roussel calls for it in a signed statement of 16 October 2025 (pcf.fr), already cited in this file: the position now counts this minimum tax in addition to the return of the ISF. Summary completed.Version 3
Inheritance and gift taxCosting revised: the note acknowledges the bias (only the cost of the allowance is costed, not the part on large inheritances; the per-heir reading, adopted for want of a published distribution for the threshold reading, which is more faithful to the words, is the most costly); under the common rule, central value at the lower bound of the coefficient, which has only one value: amount unchanged.Version 4
Inheritance and gift taxCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the exemption of inheritances below €200,000 is costed as an allowance in the direct line raised to €200,000 (€1.5bn, extrapolated, assumption); the increase on the largest inheritances, with no threshold or rate, remains not costed.Version 3
VATSource revised: the quote was BFMTV's report, in which the « 5 % » came from a follow-up by the journalist; it is now taken from the programme itself (video on RMC's YouTube channel, 4 min 42 s): the candidate calls for VAT « de 20 à 5,5 % » [“from 20 to 5.5%”] and names electricity, gas and fuels. Costing revised: gas, which he cites, is included in the costing (new cost schedule option, calculated like the other options by energy): €9.09bn of lost revenue instead of €8.31bn (€9.09bn to €10.79bn); heating oil, not cited, is not costed. Position put back to being checked.Version 5
VATCosting revised: only the energies cited by the candidate for VAT are costed (rule common to all): fuels and electricity, based on the Institut Montaigne's breakdown by product and the SDES 2022 energy balance; gas and heating oil, not cited, are removed from the costing: €8.31bn instead of €9.52bn.Version 4
Medical deductiblesCosting revised: the cost of abolishing the medical deductibles (franchises médicales) and flat-rate contributions is now justified by the sources cited in the cost schedule (REPSS and the government estimate of the 2024 doubling): €2.1bn central (€2.1bn to €2.3bn) instead of €2.4bn (€2.1bn to €2.8bn), unsourced values removed (rule common to all).Version 3
Extra-billing by doctorsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); reading corrected according to the exact quote (« remboursement à 100 % […] sans reste à charge » [“100% reimbursement […] with no out-of-pocket cost”]): coverage of extra fees by the national health insurance (Assurance maladie), €4.3bn to €6.6bn a year in 2032; the ban at zero cost is cited as another reading.Version 4
Extra-billing by doctorsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); « mettre fin aux dépassements » [“put an end to extra fees”] read as their ban, without public coverage: zero budgetary cost; the other reading (coverage by the national health insurance (Assurance maladie), €4.3bn to €6.6bn in 2032) is cited.Version 3
Social housingCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 4
Police and gendarmerie numbersCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); 60,000 staff costed at the average cost of a police and gendarmerie post, breakdown not stated, instead of “not costed”; the announced amount of €2.5bn remains cited.Version 4
Violence against women and childrenCosting revised: the €3bn of the comprehensive law (loi intégrale, Article 68) is a total amount of appropriations, whereas €1.5bn is already spent according to the Government; most cautious reading, the same for all: +€1.5bn a year instead of +€3bn, partial costing.Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 6
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: under the “net” convention of 18 October 2026, common to all public staff levers, the cost of one index point is counted at the central value excluding employer contributions paid to other general government bodies (€1.53bn), the full employer cost (€2.27bn) moving to the upper bound: €45.9bn (€44.1bn to €68.1bn) instead of €68.1bn; the note says so.Version 5
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the note described the parameter as unbounded; the cost schedule now bounds its range at 13%, and the 30% increase is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such. The overlap with the SMIC is declared in the cost schedule.Version 4
Energy renovations per yearCosting revised: « jusqu'à 900 000 » [“up to 900,000”] is costed at the cited number alone and now marked partial, like any “up to” value (rule of 18 October 2026, common to all); the zero out-of-pocket cost for the lowest-income households is flagged as not costed. Amount unchanged.Version 4
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 5
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: since the amount is acknowledged to be overestimated beyond the six EPR2 of the PPE3, the subsequent ones being disbursed later than the coefficient assumes, the central value is lowered to the coefficient's lower bound (€0.61bn per reactor, EDF's December 2025 estimate, 60% financed by a State loan paid out over 12 years), under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: €8.5bn instead of €10.2bn (range unchanged, €8.5bn to €16.8bn). State loan, counted in the debt, separate from the balance.Version 4
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: the position was not costed because the cited value fell outside the measured range of the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such, in part (small reactors not costed).Version 3
Electricity prices, European marketCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); target energy price not costed, with the reason common to all candidates (editors' decision). Position still not costed.Version 3
Additional public investment, per yearCosting revised: loan plan whose public spending share is not stated, not costed (common rule, the same for Jean-Luc Mélenchon; Gabriel Attal, who states the public share of his plan, remains costed), instead of a status quo counted at zero; the « prêts sans effet sur le solde » [“loans with no effect on the balance”] reading is cited in the reason.Version 5
Additional public investment, per yearCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); fund lent by the public banking group, read as having no effect on the balance (common low reading): position counted at zero.Version 4
Everyday transportCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); free transport in the metropolitan areas costed by the fare revenue of the networks outside Paris with a metro or tramway (Cour des comptes, new cost schedule option), Grand Paris not costed.Version 4
Voting ageSource revised: the quote was the France Inter journalist's sentence (« Il s'oppose au droit de vote à 16 ans » [“He opposes the right to vote at 16”]); it is now the candidate's own answer to the questionnaire published on the same page (question 37: « Non » [“No”]). No more recent statement was found; an amendment co-signed in October 2020, which allowed municipalities to experiment with voting at 16 in local elections, is older. Direction of change unchanged; position put back to being checked.Version 3
Defence budgetCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); rejection of the €36bn of the update of the military programming costed as a return to the initial trajectory of the 2023 law (2030 gap maintained in 2032), instead of “not costed”.Version 6
Defence budgetCorrected and validated by the editors: quote aligned with the video, double transcription; the source is the programme itself (video on RMC's YouTube channel, 21 min 05 s) and no longer the BFMTV article, which had rewritten his words; agriculture is not a third item, the summary now cites only hospitals and schools; remarks in the conditional (« si la France continue à se surarmer » [“if France continues to over-arm”]), flagged in the reason for not costingVersion 5
Defence budgetSource revised: the quote mixed his words with sentences by the BFMTV journalist, including « l'effort de guerre est [...] trop pesant sur notre économie » [“the war effort is [...] too heavy a burden on our economy”], which is the journalist's question and not his sentence; it now keeps only his words, quoted in quotation marks (checked against the video of the programme, RMC's YouTube channel, 21 min 06 s). Direction of change unchanged; position put back to being checked; still not costed.Version 4

François Ruffin 22 corrections

Old age and long-term careCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); rule on bases examined: the cost depends on the amount, not stated, of the « version adaptée » [“adapted version”] of the shared-living allowance (up to €10,000 per resident today); still not costed, reason clarified.Version 5
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the note states the contribution period assumption used (the quote does not call for the 40 years of contributions: current-law period, not costed), specifies that the upper bound of the coefficient (€9bn per year of age), used for the central value, is a calculation by the editors (€27bn ÷ 3, Institut Montaigne 2022) and cites the Institut Montaigne's 2024 benchmark (€58bn for a broader package, of which €35.2bn for age and contribution period). Amount unchanged.Version 5
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the note acknowledges that linear extrapolation below 62 underestimates the cost; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: when the note acknowledges a bias in the costing, the central value is moved to the bound that corrects it (upper bound for an underestimate); the central value is raised to the coefficient's upper bound (€9bn per year of age): €33.75bn instead of €27.38bn (range unchanged, €21.75bn to €33.75bn). Same treatment as Fabien Roussel's position.Version 4
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the position was not costed because the cited value fell outside the measured range of the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such (assumption: contribution period under current law).Version 3
Survivors' pensionsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); no recent public base (PACS (civil partnerships) dissolved by death not published since 2016; ministerial costings of 2007 and 2012 contradictory, under the law of the time): still not costed, reason clarified.Version 3
Tax and social security expendituresCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the end of the holding-period allowance on real estate capital gains, replaced by the deduction of inflation, is costed by the Cour des comptes (€1.5bn to €3.0bn); the furnished-rentals component, with no amount, remains not costed (partial costing).Version 8
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Costing revised: Zucman tax reinstated (decision of 18 October 2026, which replaces the one of the same day): the 2% minimum tax on wealth above €100m is once again costed and added, at the high end of the estimates (€15bn to €25bn, its promoters' estimate, which the administration has not simulated). The vote for the Zucman tax counts as a proposal: the position, until now not costed, now includes this minimum tax.Version 6
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Costing revised: the reason said the position was not costed as long as no campaign text commits to it; the vote counts as a position, but the Zucman tax is not costed for any candidate (rule of 18 October 2026). Position still not costed.Version 5
Taxes on fuel and energyCorrected and validated by the editors: quote aligned with the video, double transcriptionVersion 4
Taxes on fuel and energySource revised: the quote was the Sud Radio article's rewording of his words (« D'abord, contrôler… Ensuite, remettre une taxe flottante… » [“First, control… Then, bring back a floating tax…”]), which the video does not contain word for word; it is now taken from the broadcast itself (video on Sud Radio's YouTube channel, 2 min 49 s). The tax works both ways (it rises again when the oil price falls) and the control of margins must be « automatique » [“automatic”]; the reason for not costing says so. Position put back to being checked; still not costed.Version 3
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCosting revised: the 15% amendment co-signed by Gabriel Attal and Olivier Becht is costed at a rate of 15% for all liable companies, its €2bn threshold not being modelled; same treatment here, the position is costed at the increased rate of 15% (and no longer at 6%), as an assumption and partially: the 6% rate for liable companies below this threshold is not modelled, and the amount is overestimated accordingly; the central value is therefore brought down to the lower bound of the coefficient (yield of one point according to the revised forecast for 2026), under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: €3.6bn (3.6 to 3.9) instead of €1bn at the 6% rate.Version 4
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCosting revised: the cost schedule now costs the rate of the digital services tax (parameter added on 18 October 2026, coefficient calculated by the editors); the position, until then not costed, is costed at the rate cited, assuming the lowest (6%), and partially (increased rate of 15% not costed).Version 3
Windfall profits and share buybacksCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the 4% tax on dividends paid is costed on the yield of the former 3% contribution on amounts distributed (€2.4bn, editors' assumption).Version 3
Financial transaction taxCosting revised: the rate is now costed at the yield of the increase from 0.3% to 0.4% costed by the Senate finance committee (€0.6bn per 0.1 point), a primary source that replaces the coefficient calculated by the editors (€0.74bn): €1.2bn of revenue instead of 1.5 (rule common to all).Version 4
Financial transaction taxCosting revised: the cost schedule now costs the rate of the financial transactions tax (parameter added on 18 October 2026, coefficient calculated by the editors); the position, until then not costed, is costed at the rate cited, as an assumption and partially (extension of the base not costed).Version 3
Social housingCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 4
Violence against women and childrenCosting revised: the €3bn of the comprehensive law (loi intégrale, Article 68) is a total amount of appropriations, whereas €1.5bn is already spent according to the Government; most cautious reading, the same for all: +€1.5bn a year instead of +€3bn, partial costing.Version 3
Electricity prices, European marketCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); target energy price not costed, with the reason common to all candidates (editors' decision). Position still not costed.Version 5
Motorway concessionsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the end of the concessions is read as a takeover when they expire (cost-schedule option, zero static cost), the cut in tolls remaining not costed for lack of a rate.Version 3
Citizens' initiative referendum (RIC)Costing revised: RIC treated as an institutional reform outside the budget, a reason common to all candidates (decision of 18 October 2026).Version 3
Voting ageCorrected and validated by the editors: quote aligned with the video, double transcriptionVersion 4
Voting ageSource revised: the quote was the franceinfo journalist's sentence (« ont également plaidé pour le droit de vote dès 16 ans » [“also argued for the right to vote from age 16”]); it is now taken from a video of the candidate published on his YouTube channel on 7 October 2026 (1 min 04 s), in which he lists « le vote à 16 ans » [“voting at 16”] among his proposals to upper secondary school pupils. In May 2024 he had co-signed a constitutional amendment opening the vote from age 16 (amendment No. 70, text No. 2424). Direction unchanged; position put back to being checked.Version 3

Marine Tondelier 38 corrections

Reductions in social contributions on low wagesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the end of exemptions above 1.6 times the SMIC (minimum wage) is costed on the reductions paid above 1.6 times the SMIC (€12.7bn to €15.8bn, chart of the expert group on the SMIC, 2024 regime).Version 3
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCosting revised: the RSA coefficient, taken from the 2020 order (2018 euros), is updated to the 2026 lump-sum amount (€0.17bn per point instead of 0.14; lower bound 0.15, the effect on households already receiving the benefit alone), rule common to all: €2.28bn instead of 1.88. The line remains partial (entry of new households not costed beyond +10%).Version 7
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCosting revised: the note acknowledges that the linear extrapolation does not count the entry of new households, and therefore underestimates the cost; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: when the note acknowledges a bias in the costing, the central value is moved to the bound that corrects it (upper bound for an underestimate); the central value is set at the upper bound of the coefficient, which has only one value (€0.14bn per point): amount unchanged, reason now displayed on the line. Same treatment as Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s position.Version 6
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited lay outside the measured range of the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such; guarantee read as a lump-sum amount raised to 50% of the net SMIC, as an assumption and in part.Version 5
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 4
Minimum pensionCosting revised: the central value had been set at the upper bound of the coefficient, which the cost schedule itself describes as overstating the cost (all beneficiaries assumed to receive the full increase); it returns to the central value of the coefficient, as an assumption (rule common to all): €2.84bn instead of 4.21. The note cites the Institut Montaigne costing (€13.9bn by 2027 for a minimum contributory pension at the SMIC level of €1,600) as an external reference point, not counted.Version 5
Minimum pensionCosting revised: the note acknowledges that the costing underestimates the cost (the poverty line, measured in 2024, will be higher when the target is reached); under the acknowledged-bias rule, common to all, the central value goes to the highest amount of the coefficient (2.84 → €4.21bn of spending), range unchanged.Version 4
Minimum pensionCosting revised: the position was not costed for lack of a timetable; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all, a target is costed at its value once reached, like the pension minima targeted by Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Fabien Roussel. Minimum pension for a full career raised to the poverty line (+€81 per month), as an assumption and in part (ASPA, agricultural pensions and women’s pensions not costed).Version 3
Income tax scaleCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the 60% bracket above €250,000 per share is costed on DGFiP (public finances directorate) data by marginal rate (€1.0bn to €1.6bn, editors' assumption); the cut on the lower brackets, with no amount, remains not costed (partial costing).Version 3
CSG (general social contribution)Costing revised: the income tax correction applies only to the deductible part of the CSG (rule common to all, also applied to the CSG on earned income); for one point added to all rates, assumed deductible, it applies to almost the whole base; the note says so, with the possible gap (at most €0.25bn). Amount unchanged.Version 4
Tax and social security expendituresCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the tax exemption of maintenance payments received is costed by the tax legislation directorate (direction de la législation fiscale) (€0.12bn); the overall cap on tax expenditures and the limit of two dwellings, with no amount, remain not costed (partial costing).Version 4
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Costing revised: Zucman tax reinstated (decision of 18 October 2026, which replaces the one of the same day): the 2% minimum tax on fortunes of more than €100m is once again costed and added, at the upper end of the estimates (€15bn to €25bn, an estimate by its proponents, which the administration has not simulated). The position once again counts the minimum tax in addition to the return of the ISF.Version 6
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Costing revised: the Zucman tax is no longer added for any candidate (rule of 18 October 2026): its yield, estimated by its proponents at between €15bn and €25bn, has not been costed by any administration. Only the return of the ISF is still counted.Version 5
Inheritance and gift taxCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the contribution of 10% above €4m and a further 10% above €13m is costed on the distribution of inheritances of the CAE (Council of Economic Analysis) (€1.8bn to €1.9bn); the other parts remain not costed (partial costing).Version 4
VATCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); only the named increase whose base is published is costed (works other than energy renovation raised from 10 to 20%, €2.2bn to €2.5bn); the cuts and the other increases, with no published base, remain not costed (partial costing).Version 4
Taxation of digital giants and multinationalsCosting revised: the cost schedule now costs the rate of the digital services tax (parameter added on 18 October 2026, coefficient calculated by the editors); the position, previously not costed, is costed at the rate cited, as an assumption and in part (extension of the base not costed).Version 3
Financial transaction taxCosting revised: the rate is now costed at the yield of the increase from 0.3% to 0.4% costed by the Senate finance committee (€0.6bn per 0.1 point), a primary source that replaces the coefficient calculated by the editors (€0.74bn): €1.8bn of revenue instead of 2.2 (rule common to all).Version 4
Financial transaction taxCosting revised: the cost schedule now costs the rate of the financial transactions tax (parameter added on 18 October 2026, coefficient calculated by the editors); the position, until then not costed, is costed at the rate cited, as an assumption and partially (extension of the base not costed).Version 3
Announced savingsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); refocusing of the research tax credit on SMEs and mid-sized companies (PME and ETI) costed on the claims of large companies (MESR (higher education and research ministry)), new cost schedule option; the rest of the position remains not costed.Version 4
State grants to local authoritiesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); abolition of the DILICO (local authority revenue smoothing mechanism) read as having no cost for the State in 2032 (the levy returns in full to local authorities, Finance Act for 2026), instead of “not costed”.Version 3
Pupils per class, primaryCosting revised: single « net » convention for public staff (rule R9): at the centre, cost excluding all employer contributions paid to other general government bodies, converted to pay for active staff using the ratio from the PAP 2024 (about 1.15, editors’ calculation); full employer cost as upper bound. Central value €1.2bn → €1.05bn.Version 3
Teachers' payCosting revised: single “net” convention for public staff (rule R9): at the centre, cost excluding all employer contributions paid to other general government bodies, related to pay for active staff using the PAP 2024 ratio (about 1.15, editors' calculation); full employer cost as the upper bound. Central value 6.15 → €5.36bn; the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors' assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4).Version 3
Funding of private schoolsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); reduction of the public share to 50% costed on the 2022 resources of private schools under contract (National Assembly report no. 2423), cost schedule option, instead of “not costed”.Version 3
Research, share of GDPCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); target of 3% of GDP costed on its public share, read for all according to the Barcelona target (one third of the increase), instead of “not costed”.Version 3
Medical deductiblesCosting revised: the cost of abolishing the medical deductibles (franchises médicales) and flat-rate contributions is now justified by the sources cited in the cost schedule (REPSS and the government estimate of the 2024 doubling): €2.1bn central (€2.1bn to €2.3bn) instead of €2.4bn (€2.1bn to €2.8bn), unsourced values removed (rule common to all).Version 4
Personal housing benefits (APL)Costing revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 3
Prisons and sentencesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); moratorium costed on the remaining net places of the 15,000 plan on which work has not yet started (gross-to-net conversion at the observed ratio), instead of “not costed”; the numerus clausus remains not costed.Version 4
Resources for the justice systemCosting revised: single “net” convention for public staff (rule R9): at the centre, cost excluding all employer contributions paid to other general government bodies, converted to activity pay using the PAP 2024 ratio (about 1.15, editors’ calculation); full employer cost as the upper bound. Central value 0.78 → €0.65bn.Version 3
Violence against women and childrenCosting revised: the €3bn of the comprehensive law (loi intégrale, Article 68) is a total amount of appropriations, whereas €1.5bn is already spent according to the Government; most cautious reading, the same for all: +€1.5bn a year instead of +€3bn, partial costing.Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); indexation of the public sector pay index point to inflation (common inflation assumption) and a 10% increase for categories B and C (pay bill calculated from the DGAFP (civil service directorate) 2026 annual report) costed, cost schedule options; the category A staff targeted remain not costed.Version 3
Adaptation to climate changeCosting revised: the amount announced relates to the 2027 budget; it is now marked with a different year. Position still not costed.Version 3
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 3
Wind and solarCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); target share of renewables converted into TWh supported beyond the PPE3 (multi-annual energy plan), at the cost schedule coefficient (same method as for any volume target).Version 3
Electricity prices, European marketCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the cut in the excise duty on electricity to the level of that on gas, a tax measure, is now costed on the new parameter for the rate for sites of 36 kVA or less (same base for all), as a reading assumption.Version 4
Additional public investment, per yearCosting revised: the amount announced relates to the 2027 budget; it is now marked with a different year. Costed amount unchanged.Version 5
Motorway concessionsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); the gradual renationalisation is read as taking back each concession when it expires (cost schedule option, zero static cost), early buyback being cited.Version 3
Citizens' initiative referendum (RIC)Costing revised: RIC treated as an institutional reform outside the budget, a reason common to all candidates (decision of 18 October 2026).Version 3
Right of asylumCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); cost of collegiality at the CNDA estimated (negligible, less than €0.01bn) and cited in the reason; position still not costed.Version 4

Éric Zemmour 54 corrections

RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); three-year limit costed on the length of time RSA recipients have been on the benefit (DREES), instead of not costed.Version 6
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsSource reviewed: the quotation was BFMTV's account, in which the three-year cap was a sentence by the journalist; it is now taken from the broadcast itself (video on the candidate's YouTube channel, 49 min 00 s): he proposes « de plafonner à 3 ans le versement du RSA » [“capping payment of the RSA at 3 years”] and himself puts the measure at « 4 milliards 8 » [“4.8 billion”], with a condition, « sans contrepartie » [“with nothing required in return”], different from that of Sarah Knafo's plan; the announced amount and the reason say so. Position marked as being checked again; still not costed.Version 4
Family allowancesCosting revised: Sarah Knafo's plan is taken up by the candidate (« la matrice de mon programme économique » [“the matrix of my economic programme”]; counter-budget presented as « le programme Reconquête » [“the Reconquête programme”]): the measure counts as his position, and no longer as a measure of his associates.Version 5
Family allowancesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); allowances reserved for French nationals costed by the common rule (decision 4), a measure of the candidate's associates (Sarah Knafo's plan), instead of not costed.Version 4
Legal retirement ageSource reviewed: the quotation was the franceinfo article of 30 September 2026, which relayed BFMTV's account. It is now taken from the broadcast itself (video on the candidate's YouTube channel): « Je dis 64 voire 65 » [“I say 64 or even 65”], then, in the ensuing debate: « augmenter l'âge pivot de la retraite jusqu'à 65 ans. Je l'assume. […] J'ai dit 64 en 2022 » [“raise the pivot age for retirement to 65. I stand by it. […] I said 64 in 2022”]. As the candidate's last word is 65, the most cautious value of a range no longer applies. Costing revised: 65 at the current pace (Cour des comptes option, €4.7bn in 2035), the most cautious reading of an unstated timetable, as for David Lisnard, instead of 64 (about €1.8bn), minus the share common with the contribution period; the direction of change moves from “other” to “increase” (65 beyond current law). Position marked as being checked again.Version 6
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the overlap with the contribution period, also raised, no longer keeps only the higher of the two gains; the share common to both increases is measured from Cnav data (report annexed to the PLFRSS 2023, table 5: 8% of the gain from the age, 23% of that from the period) and subtracted from the smaller one. The gain from the age, hitherto displayed without being added, is now counted, minus about €0.15bn of common share (rule common to all).Version 5
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: « 64 voire 65 ans » [“64 or even 65”] is costed at the most cautious value and now marked partial, like any range (rule of 18 October 2026, common to all). Amount unchanged.Version 4
Contribution periodCosting revised: as the candidate's legal retirement age is now costed at 65 (€4.7bn, source reviewed the same day), its gain becomes the higher of the two: it is counted in full, and the share common to both increases (about €0.38bn, according to the Cnav) is subtracted from that of the contribution period: €3.62bn at the centre instead of €4bn. Rule common to all, applied in the same way to Édouard Philippe.Version 7
Contribution periodCosting revised: the note acknowledges that the coefficient for the extension, from 2035, slightly overstates the 2032 gain; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: when the note acknowledges a bias in the costing, the central value is brought to the bound that corrects it (lower bound for an overestimate); here, the lower bound of the coefficient (€1bn per quarter): gain of €4bn before overlap with the legal retirement age, instead of €5.2bn. Same treatment as Édouard Philippe's position.Version 6
Contribution periodCosting revised: the extension is now costed at the coefficient the Cour des comptes gives for an increase (€5.2bn in 2035 for four more quarters, i.e. €1.3bn per quarter) and no longer at that for a decrease (€0.75bn): €5.2bn (€4bn to €5.2bn) instead of €3bn. 176 quarters is within the domain measured by the Cour: no more extrapolation. The gain from the legal retirement age is now added, minus the share common to both increases measured from Cnav data (rule common to all).Version 5
Contribution periodCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited lay outside the measured domain of the parameter; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such; « 44, 45, 46 ans » [“44, 45, 46 years”] is costed at the most cautious value, as an assumption and in part.Version 4
CSG (general social contribution)Costing revised: measure of the candidate's associates (decision of 18 October 2026); the abolition of the CSG on earned income, proposed by Sarah Knafo and not taken up by the candidate, is costed (€100.7bn revenue loss at the centre) and shown separately, without being added.Version 8
CSG (general social contribution)Costing revised: no statement by Éric Zemmour takes up the abolition of the CSG on earned income, a measure from the book by Sarah Knafo, who holds no established mandate to carry his programme (check of 18 October 2026); an associate's position is not the candidate's: cited, not costed (rule common to all). €97.1bn of revenue loss is removed from the totals; the coefficient itself is corrected (€100.7bn at the centre, the income tax correction applying only to the deductible part).Version 7
CSG (general social contribution)Costing revised: note completed; the financing of the abolition, looked for in accessible sources, is the overall savings plan (€130bn in the book, €140bn on budget2027.fr), with no line-by-line allocation; those of its measures that have a lever in the cost schedule are already costed. Amount unchanged.Version 6
CSG (general social contribution)Costing revised: the cost schedule now costs the abolition of the CSG on earned income at its published yield (€111bn in 2025), like other tax abolitions (rule common to all). Position costed: €97.1bn of revenue loss at the centre (net of income tax), €111bn as the upper bound, as an assumption.Version 5
CSG (general social contribution)Costing revised: the reason is clarified; the lever's parameter covers all bases, and the option on earned income is a fixed amount for one point, which cannot be extrapolated. Position still not costed.Version 4
Taxes on fuel and energySource reviewed: the quotation was BFMTV's account, which attributed the cut by a third to the candidate in a sentence by the journalist and wrongly put the energy savings certificates at 42 centimes; it is now taken from the broadcast itself (video on the candidate's YouTube channel, 4 min 58 s): a third of the excise duty (« à peu près 27 centimes » [“about 27 centimes”]) and the certificates (« à peu près 15 centimes » [“about 15 centimes”]), 42 centimes in all. The €12bn are his words on 19 May 2026, repeated by him on 17 September. Costing unchanged; position marked as being checked again.Version 5
Taxes on fuel and energyCosting revised: the VAT paid by households on the excise duty is a real revenue loss, only that paid by businesses is recoverable; the central coefficient now removes only business VAT (household share: 63.5% of road fuel excise, SDES 2022), rule common to all, and the central value is no longer brought down to the lowest amount: €11.13bn of revenue loss instead of €9.87bn (€9.87bn to €12.6bn).Version 4
Taxes on fuel and energyCosting revised: the central coefficient counts VAT on the excise duty, which is recoverable for businesses; under the acknowledged-bias rule, the central value goes to the lower bound, excluding VAT (€12.18bn → €9.87bn of revenue loss), range unchanged.Version 3
Corporate income taxCosting revised: Sarah Knafo's plan is taken up by the candidate (« la matrice de mon programme économique » [“the matrix of my economic programme”]; counter-budget presented as « le programme Reconquête » [“the Reconquête programme”]): the measure counts as his position, and no longer as a measure of his associates.Version 5
Corporate income taxCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); measure of the candidate's associates (decision of 18 October 2026): the abolition of the exceptional surcharge, absent from the law in 2032, is costed at zero cost, shown separately, without being added.Version 4
Production taxesCosting revised: Sarah Knafo's plan is taken up by the candidate (« la matrice de mon programme économique » [“the matrix of my economic programme”]; counter-budget presented as « le programme Reconquête » [“the Reconquête programme”]): the measure counts as his position, and no longer as a measure of his associates.Version 4
Production taxesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); measure of the candidate's associates (decision of 18 October 2026): shown separately, without being added; amount unchanged (zero cost).Version 3
Level of public spendingSource reviewed: the quotation mixed his words with sentences from Europe 1's live coverage (19 May 2026: « au minimum 100 milliards par an de baisse des dépenses publiques » [“at least 100 billion a year of cuts in public spending”]). His most recent statement on the level of spending prevails: « Je veux simplement ramener de 57 % à 50 % » [“I simply want to bring it back from 57% to 50%”] (BFMTV, 17 September 2026, video on the candidate's YouTube channel, 57 min 36 s). The summary says so. Position marked as being checked again; still not costed.Version 3
Announced savingsSource reviewed: the sentence that BFMTV's account put in quotation marks (« Nous, avec Sarah Knafo, nous voulons faire 140 milliards d'euros de baisses » [“We, with Sarah Knafo, want to make 140 billion euros of cuts”]) is not found as such in the broadcast, and the scope « dépenses de l'État » [“State spending”] was the journalist's; the quotation is now taken from the broadcast itself (video on the candidate's YouTube channel, 10 min 03 s). The summary no longer says « de l'État » [“of the State”]. Position marked as being checked again; still not costed.Version 5
Ability groups, organisation of lower secondary schoolSource reviewed: the quotation was BFMTV's account, in which the end of the collège unique was a sentence by the journalist; it is now taken from the broadcast itself (video on the candidate's YouTube channel, 48 min 15 s). He repeated it on 12 October 2026 on RTL (« il faut supprimer le collège unique, il faut rétablir des examens à chaque niveau » [“the collège unique must be abolished, exams must be restored at every level”]). Direction unchanged; position marked as being checked again; still not costed.Version 3
University tuition feesCosting revised: Sarah Knafo's plan is taken up by the candidate (« la matrice de mon programme économique » [“the matrix of my economic programme”]; counter-budget presented as « le programme Reconquête » [“the Reconquête programme”]): the measure counts as his position, and no longer as a measure of his associates.Version 4
University tuition feesCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); end of free tuition read as differentiated fees with no exemption (fin-exonerations-droits-differencies option), a measure of the candidate's associates, instead of not costed.Version 3
Personal housing benefits (APL)Costing revised: the note says why the central value is at 16.4% (share of spending measured and published, a minimum for all foreigners) whereas that for family allowances is at 9.1% (no published share, upper bound pending from the Cnaf); rule common to both candidates (decision 4 of 18 October 2026), amount unchanged.Version 6
Personal housing benefits (APL)Costing revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); APL abolished for foreigners costed by the common rule (decision 4), instead of not costed.Version 5
Personal housing benefits (APL)Source reviewed: the quotation was BFMTV's account, in which abolishing APL for foreigners was a sentence by the journalist; it is now taken from the broadcast itself (video on the candidate's YouTube channel, 12 min 08 s): he calls for the abolition of non-contributory benefits for foreigners and answers « Terminé » [“Over”] to the question on APL (in square brackets). Direction unchanged; position marked as being checked again; still not costed.Version 3
Emergency shelterCosting revised: Sarah Knafo's plan is taken up by the candidate (« la matrice de mon programme économique » [“the matrix of my economic programme”]; counter-budget presented as « le programme Reconquête » [“the Reconquête programme”]): the measure counts as his position, and no longer as a measure of his associates.Version 4
Emergency shelterCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); places occupied by people in an irregular situation (IGF-IGAS-IGA spending review, 2025) counted as fewer places, a measure of the candidate's associates, instead of not costed.Version 3
Prisons and sentencesCorrected and validated by the editors: quote aligned with the video, double transcriptionVersion 4
Prisons and sentencesSource reviewed: the quotation mixed his words with the sentence from Europe 1's live coverage (19 May 2026), which spoke of « réduire le rôle du juge d'application des peines » [“reducing the role of the sentence enforcement judge”]; the candidate in fact calls for it to be abolished, on 19 May as on 13 October 2026 (CNews, video on his YouTube channel, 4 min 50 s), the most recent source, now cited. The summary says so. Position marked as being checked again; still not costed.Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsSource reviewed: the quotation was BFMTV's account, in which the 800,000 posts were a sentence by the journalist; it is now taken from the broadcast itself (video on the candidate's YouTube channel, 10 min 13 s): the candidate himself gives the 800,000 posts and the non-replacement of departures, like Sarah Knafo's plan. Costing unchanged; position marked as being checked again.Version 7
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the position is now marked as an editors' assumption by the engine, as its coefficient is calculated by the editors (rule R4); the announced amount is no longer compared with the costing (editors' assumption). Amount unchanged.Version 6
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the announced amount (€40bn of savings) falls within the costing range (€22.4bn to €49.6bn); under the rule common to all, no gap is calculated any longer with an announcement that falls within the range. Amount unchanged.Version 5
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited fell outside the parameter's measured range; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such.Version 4
Public broadcastingCosting revised: Sarah Knafo's plan is taken up by the candidate (« la matrice de mon programme économique » [“the matrix of my economic programme”]; counter-budget presented as « le programme Reconquête » [“the Reconquête programme”]): the measure counts as his position, and no longer as a measure of his associates.Version 5
Public broadcastingCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); same reading as for any privatisation of « l'audiovisuel public » [“public broadcasting”] with no defined scope (common option: €3.0bn at the centre instead of 3.75, upper bound 3.88), and marked “associates” (Sarah Knafo's plan), decision of 18 October 2026.Version 4
New nuclear reactorsSource reviewed: the quotation was the JDD's account of the speech (8 October 2026), without a single word from the candidate; it is now taken from the speech itself (video published by BFMTV, 43 min 02 s): « 6 EPR d'ici [20]35, 14 d'ici 2045 » [“6 EPRs by [20]35, 14 by 2045”]. Content and costing unchanged; position marked as being checked again.Version 8
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: the position is now flagged by the engine as an editors’ assumption, its coefficient being calculated by the editors (rule R4). Amount unchanged.Version 7
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: since the amount is acknowledged to be overestimated beyond the six EPR2s of the PPE3, the following ones being disbursed later than the coefficient assumes, the central value is brought down to the lower bound of the coefficient (€0.61bn per reactor, EDF estimate of December 2025, 60% financed by a State loan paid out over 12 years), under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all: €4.9bn instead of 5.8 (range unchanged, 4.9 to 9.6). State loan, counted in the debt, separately from the balance.Version 6
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised: the position was not costed because the value cited fell outside the parameter's measured range; under the rule of 18 October 2026, common to all candidates, such a value is costed by linear extrapolation, flagged as such.Version 5
Labour immigration and residence permitsSource reviewed: the quotation was the AFP dispatch carried by RTL, which also attributed to him « plus de six mois à un an » [“more than six months to a year”], words from the journalist's question; it is now taken from the broadcast itself (video on the candidate's YouTube channel, 22 min 44 s). To the question about a legally resident foreigner unemployed « depuis plus de six mois, un an » [“for more than six months, a year”], he answers « un an » [“a year”] (attribution uncertain, overlapping voices) and recalls that « tout étranger qui pèse sur les finances publiques doit être expulsé » [“any foreigner who is a burden on public finances must be expelled”]. Direction unchanged; position marked as being checked again.Version 4
Right of asylumSource reviewed: the quotation is the passage of the speech that CNews reproduces word for word, in quotation marks, and not the journalist's reading; it is kept, and the source says so. No transcript or full video of the speech published by Reconquête has been found.Version 3
State medical aid (Aide médicale de l'État)Costing revised: Sarah Knafo's plan is taken up by the candidate (« la matrice de mon programme économique » [“the matrix of my economic programme”]; counter-budget presented as « le programme Reconquête » [“the Reconquête programme”]): the measure counts as his position, and no longer as a measure of his associates.Version 5
State medical aid (Aide médicale de l'État)Costing revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); measure from Sarah Knafo's plan marked “associates” (decision of 18 October 2026): costing unchanged, shown separately and not added.Version 4
State medical aid (Aide médicale de l'État)Costing revised: the position is now marked as an editors' assumption by the engine, as its coefficient is calculated by the editors (rule R4); the announced amount is no longer compared with the costing (editors' assumption). Amount unchanged.Version 3
Place in the European UnionCosting revised: a past level is compared in constant euros (deflator: Insee, consumer price index, 2019 to 2026); the 2019 levy (€21.025bn) is worth €24.86bn in 2026 euros, hence a gain of €3.58bn instead of 7.41 (reading in current euros, cited in the note as the upper bound of reading).Version 5
Place in the European UnionCosting revised: Sarah Knafo's plan is taken up by the candidate (« la matrice de mon programme économique » [“the matrix of my economic programme”]; counter-budget presented as « le programme Reconquête » [“the Reconquête programme”]): the measure counts as his position, and no longer as a measure of his associates.Version 4
Place in the European UnionCosting revised: rule on public bases (18 October 2026); return of the contribution to the EU to its pre-Covid level costed on the finance act for 2026 and the levy executed in 2019, new cost schedule parameter, and marked “associates” (Sarah Knafo's plan).Version 3
Secularism (laïcité)Source reviewed: the quotation was BFMTV's account, in which « interdire la kippa dans la rue » [“ban the kippah in the street”] was the journalist's wording; it is now taken from the broadcast itself (video on the candidate's YouTube channel, 27 min 24 s): he answers « Oui » [“Yes”] to banning the veil in the street, and « Dans l'espace public, oui » [“In public space, yes”] for the kippah; the journalist's questions are in square brackets. Direction unchanged; position marked as being checked again.Version 3

15 October 2026

1 correction · Raphaël Glucksmann (1)

Raphaël Glucksmann 1 correction

CSG (general social contribution)Costing revised: the reason stated the decrease with no amount; the candidate puts the increase in net pay it funds at €15bn (remarks reported by Public Sénat on 24 August 2026, the source of his position on inheritance tax). Amount cited as an announced amount, not taken up: position still not costed. (v2, 2026-10-14) Then: Reviewed and validated by the editors (v3, 2026-10-15)Version 3

14 October 2026

286 corrections · Gabriel Attal (20), Nicolas Dupont-Aignan (22), Raphaël Glucksmann (20), Marine Le Pen (16), David Lisnard (29), Jean-Luc Mélenchon (41), Édouard Philippe (21), Bruno Retailleau (27), Fabien Roussel (19), François Ruffin (18), Marine Tondelier (36), Éric Zemmour (17)

Gabriel Attal 20 corrections

Reductions in social contributions on low wagesCosting revised: the reason now mentions the objective of a gain equivalent to a thirteenth month’s pay (visit to Brittany, 24 July 2026), which specifies neither which contributions nor which wages, and the funding announced through savings on certain social spending, including unemployment insurance and daily sickness allowances (France Info, 9 September 2026). Position still not costed.Version 4
Unemployment, max. benefit durationCosting revised: the savings announced for this reform (€5bn in the interview with Le Parisien of 3 July 2026, « plus de 4 milliards » [“more than 4 billion”] on the « Dette de l’État » page of the programme) are now cited, without being used; the reason specifies that the aim is to resume the reform launched in 2024, with no parameter given. Position still not costed.Version 3
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the reason overlooked the fact that, until the new system, he wants the 2023 reform to « reprenne son calendrier » [“resume its timetable”] (report of the REF debate, 27 August 2026), suspended by the LFSS 2026; it now mentions this. Position still not costed, for lack of a timetable for the new system.Version 3
Special pension schemes, points-based systemDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): a universal system « reposant sur les mêmes règles pour tous » [“based on the same rules for all”] and reduced to three schemes (civil servants, employees, self-employed) unifies the current architecture; the lever rule reads ↓ as more unified schemes.Version 3
Funded shareCorrected and validated by the editors: the same source also channels 50% of profit-sharing and employee participation into retirement savings plans, which had been omitted; quote extended to that sentence, summary completed, costing note clarified (this channelling is not costed). Amount unchanged.Version 3
Inheritance and gift taxCorrected and validated by the editors: the next sentence of the same source, which seeks « au contraire faciliter et fluidifier les donations du vivant » [“on the contrary to facilitate and smooth lifetime gifts”], had been omitted; quote extended, summary completed. Direction “unchanged” replaced by “decrease” (easing of gifts, like Édouard Philippe’s position on lifetime gifts), status quo costing replaced by “not costed”.Version 4
Taxes on fuel and energyCosting revised: flagged as partial; the status quo applies to fuel taxes, but the targeted support he proposes instead (in the same source, support paid by the employer free of charges and tax; on 23 September 2026, an upgraded mileage allowance scale, broader support for high-mileage drivers, fuel bonus raised to €1,000) has a cost that is not costed. Same encoding as Raphaël Glucksmann’s position (partial status quo, energy voucher not costed). Amount unchanged.Version 3
Public deficit targeted for 2032Direction of change corrected (decrease → unchanged): the trajectory in force (medium-term fiscal-structural plan 2025-2029, confirmed by the April 2026 progress report) already brings the deficit below 3% of GDP by 2029 and sets no target for 2032. Common lever rule: a target between 2.5% and 3%, or « sous 3 % » [“below 3%”], cannot be distinguished from this trajectory (unchanged); below 2.5%, decrease; above 3%, increase; with no figure, other. A deficit « sous les 3 % en 2032 » [“below 3% in 2032”] is therefore encoded like the positions of Nicolas Dupont-Aignan (less than 3% at the end of five years) and Marine Le Pen (2.9% in 2032).Version 4
Public deficit targeted for 2032Corrected and validated by the editors: the lever concerns the deficit targeted in 2032, which the quote used (« zéro déficit en 10 ans maximum » [“zero deficit in 10 years at most”], « Dette de l’État » page of the programme) did not give, whereas the candidate does set one; source replaced by the report of the REF debate (27 August 2026): deficit « sous les 3 % en 2032 » [“below 3% in 2032”], then balance in 2037. Value 3 entered, as for Nicolas Dupont-Aignan’s « sous 3 % » [“below 3%”] position.Version 3
Announced savingsCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary and the amount cited only included the €15bn emergency brake, whereas the quote announces in the same sentence a plan of €150bn of savings over the term; summary and amount cited completed (amount not added, since it is unknown whether it is annual or cumulative). The reason for not costing no longer says « sans mesures identifiées » [“without identified measures”]: several savings measures are recorded under other levers.Version 4
Pupils per class, primaryCosting revised: the reason now mentions the funding provided for in the same source, the resources freed up by the demographic decline; position still not costed (average or cap not specified).Version 3
Teachers' payCosting revised: the note now cites the funding announced in the same source (« notamment par des économies réalisées sur les dépenses sociales » [“in particular through savings made on social spending”]) and in the « École » workstream of the programme (resources freed up by the demographic decline), not counted here. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: flagged as partial; the voluntary departure plan in the quote comes with a voluntary departure bonus (interview with the JDD, 1 August 2026), cost not costed. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Emissions cut by 2030, compared with 1990Corrected and validated by the editors: the text accelerates the pace of decrease « pour respecter nos engagements climatiques » [“to meet our climate commitments”], without changing the 2030 target; in the interview with the JDD (1 August 2026), his course is « la trajectoire de réduction des émissions » [“the emissions reduction trajectory”] of the Paris agreements. Direction “other” replaced by “unchanged”, like Raphaël Glucksmann’s position on the European targets; summary reworded so as not to suggest a new target.Version 3
Electricity prices, European marketCorrected and validated by the editors: quote extended to the next sentence of the same source, which wants to hold these prices « sans dépendre de subventions permanentes de l’État » [“without depending on permanent State subsidies”]; the reason for not costing, which said it was unknown who would bear the gap, now relies on this clarification. Position still not costed.Version 3
Floor prices, farm incomeCorrected and validated by the editors: the quote stopped in the middle of the sentence and omitted the multi-year contracts of 3 to 5 years imposed on large retailers, provided for in the same proposal; quote extended to the end of the sentence, summary completed.Version 3
Additional public investment, per yearCosting revised: the announced envelope (€200bn, half public) is now cited next to the total, without being added; the reason, which described the amount as « sans durée » [“with no duration”], mentions the horizon given by the same source (« d’ici 10 ans » [“within 10 years”], « Plan France 2040 »), which sets no spending pace. Position still not costed.Version 3
Labour immigration and residence permitsCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary only included the points-based system and left out the preceding sentence on the same page, « accueillir moins pour accueillir mieux » [“admit fewer in order to admit better”], with family reunification that « doit donc diminuer » [“must therefore decrease”]; quote extended to that sentence, summary completed. Direction “creation” kept (new scheme, like the quotas of Édouard Philippe and Bruno Retailleau).Version 3
Place in the European UnionDirection of change corrected (other → increase): the same source describes the « États-Unis d’Europe » [“United States of Europe”] as a « saut fédéral » [“federal leap”] (economic, technological and ecological merger of a hard core of countries, a Parliament and a president elected by universal suffrage), i.e. deeper integration, like the positions of Marine Tondelier (federal leap) and Édouard Philippe encoded as “increase”.Version 3
Support for UkraineCorrected and validated by the editors: « continuer sans relâche à soutenir l’Ukraine » [“continue tirelessly to support Ukraine”] (programme, undated page) had been read as maintaining the current level; source replaced by a more precise and dated primary source, the report of 100% Politique on BFM TV (6 September 2026), where he proposes to finance « le soutien supplémentaire à l’Ukraine » [“the additional support for Ukraine”] with frozen Russian assets; on 21 September, on BFM TV, « l’intérêt de la France, c’est d’amplifier son soutien » [“France’s interest is to step up its support”]. Direction “unchanged” replaced by “increase”, status quo costing replaced by “not costed”.Version 3

Nicolas Dupont-Aignan 22 corrections

OvertimeCosting revised: the reason spoke of an « exonération nouvelle » [“new exemption”], whereas overtime already benefits from a reduction in employee social contributions and a capped income tax exemption; it now places the proposal relative to current law. Position still not costed.Version 3
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): a cap placed on all the benefits of a non-working person can only reduce what some claimants receive, never increase it; same direction as the restrictive positions of Bruno Retailleau and Éric Zemmour on this lever.Version 3
Special pension schemes, points-based systemDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): the lever's rule counts more unified schemes as a “decrease”; aligning agricultural pension schemes with the general scheme goes in this direction, like Gabriel Attal's universal system, encoded “decrease”.Version 3
Funded shareCosting revised: the note cites the financing announced on 11 October 2026 on Europe 1, « la moitié de la contribution à l'Union Européenne » [“half of the contribution to the European Union”], not counted here. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Tax and social security expendituresDirection of change corrected (creation → increase): the text restores a Pinel-type tax reduction, which ended at the end of 2024; under the lever's rule (more tax expenditures), it is one more tax expenditure, not an instrument of a new type.Version 3
Tax and social security fraudCorrected and validated by the editors: the position omitted, in the same list on the Économie page, the tighter checks on social security (surplus Vitale cards, pensions paid to deceased people), from which the candidate expects €20bn of savings; quote extended to this proposal, summary completed, announced amount raised from €20bn to €40bn (two targets of €20bn).Version 3
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Direction of change corrected (creation → increase): the text « rétablit » [“restores”] a wealth tax, which has existed (ISF until 2017) and of which the IFI today takes a part; it is not a tax of a new type like the minimum tax on very high wealth. Same direction as the positions of Fabien Roussel and Jean-Luc Mélenchon, which restore the ISF.Version 3
Inheritance and gift taxCorrected and validated by the editors: the position included only the first 100 hectares of farmland (Agriculture page), whereas the Économie page of the same programme (10 October 2026) also abolishes inheritance tax on the main residence, doubles the exemption ceilings for gifts and raises the exemption for transferred business shares from 75 to 90%; source replaced by this page, summary and reason for not costing completed. The programme cuts this tax far more than the position said.Version 4
VATCorrected and validated by the editors: the position omitted the abolition of VAT on a list of 50 basic necessities, provided for by the Économie page of the same programme (modified on 10 October 2026), and the €6bn cost the candidate gives for ending VAT on the tax; source replaced by this page, more recent and more complete than the « Automobilistes et motards » page (February 2026), summary completed, announced amount cited.Version 3
Taxes on fuel and energyCosting revised: the €6bn cost the candidate gives for ending VAT on the tax is now cited on the VAT position, where this measure is dealt with; it is no longer repeated here, so as not to appear twice. Position still not costed.Version 3
Corporate income taxCorrected and validated by the editors: the position included only the corporate income tax (IS) cut on reinvested profits and omitted, on the same page, the taxation of the consolidated profit of multinationals pro rata to the turnover achieved in France, from which the candidate expects €10bn of revenue after five years; quote extended to this proposal, announced revenue cited, direction “decrease” replaced by “other” (a targeted decrease and a targeted increase, the standard rate unchanged).Version 3
Production taxesCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary omitted the second half of the quote, the five-year exemption from charges for the CDI (permanent contract) of a long-term unemployed person, one more measure weighing on the balance; summary and reason for not costing completed.Version 3
Public deficit targeted for 2032Direction of change corrected (decrease → unchanged): the current trajectory (medium-term fiscal-structural plan 2025-2029, confirmed by the April 2026 progress report) already brings the deficit below 3% of GDP by 2029 and sets no target for 2032. Common rule for the lever: a target between 2.5% and 3%, or « sous 3 % » [“below 3%”], cannot be distinguished from this trajectory (unchanged); below 2.5%, decrease; above 3%, increase; with no figure, other. A deficit « à moins de 3 % » [“at less than 3%”] after five years is encoded like the positions of Gabriel Attal (below 3% in 2032) and Marine Le Pen (2.9% in 2032). Value 3 kept as the announced bound.Version 3
Local taxationDirection of change corrected (other → increase): the stated goal, to « rétablir l'autonomie » [“restore the autonomy”] (financial) of local authorities, increases their tax-raising power, which the lever's rule counts as an increase; same direction as Marine Tondelier's position (greater rate-setting power). The taxes concerned remain unspecified.Version 3
Where doctors set up practiceDirection of change corrected (creation → increase): a grant paid to medical students in exchange for a commitment to practise in an underserved area already exists, the public service commitment contract (contrat d'engagement de service public, Art. L. 632-6 of the Education Code, since 2009); the proposal takes up its principle (three years of practice), without saying whether it adds to it or replaces it; it strengthens the incentive, it does not create a scheme of a new type.Version 3
End of lifeCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary spoke of « la loi » [“the law”], whereas the remark dates from 30 May 2025, after only the first reading of the private member's bill in the National Assembly, more than a year before the law of 18 August 2026; it now dates it, like the positions of Édouard Philippe and Bruno Retailleau. The quote does not say whether he would repeal the law: direction “other” kept.Version 3
Social housingDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): counting social home ownership in the SRU law quota eases municipalities' obligation for social rental housing, and the second part limits new social rental housing in municipalities where it exceeds 50%; both point towards weaker obligations, like the positions of Bruno Retailleau and Marine Le Pen encoded “decrease”.Version 3
Industrial aid and reshoringDirection of change corrected (creation → increase): the lever measures public aid to industry, which already exists (France 2030, green industry investment tax credit); a new fund increases it without creating an instrument of a type absent from the law. Common rule: “increase” when the text adds public money to industry (subsidy, targeted tax expenditure, public aid or investment fund); “other” for a rule with no public money announced. Same encoding as the funds of Bruno Retailleau and Marine Tondelier. Costing unchanged.Version 4
Industrial aid and reshoringCorrected and validated by the editors: the « Produire en France » page, modified on 13 October 2026, now endows the fund with €4bn and no longer €10bn (version of 6 October 2026 archived); quote and summary updated. The reason for not costing (« sans rythme annuel » [“no annual rate”]) ignored the Économie page of the same programme, which gives €4bn a year: position costed at this amount, reading flagged as an assumption.Version 3
State medical aid (Aide médicale de l'État)Costing revised: the Économie page of the same programme counts the abolition of AME in a set of measures from which the candidate expects €5bn of savings; this amount, broader than AME, is now cited next to the position. Position still not costed.Version 3
Place in the European UnionCosting revised: the reason now cites the announcement of 11 October 2026 on 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 capital of €10,000 per newborn. Position and direction unchanged: leaving the EU by referendum remains his position on this lever; the announcement is not costed.Version 3
NATODirection of change corrected (abolition → decrease): the text leaves the integrated command, not the Alliance; “abolition” read as leaving NATO. Jean-Luc Mélenchon's position, encoded “abolition”, does provide for subsequently leaving the organisation.Version 3

Raphaël Glucksmann 20 corrections

RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary did not say that the position comes from the Parti socialiste programme, adopted by its members on 25 June 2026, before the candidate was designated; it now specifies this.Version 3
Nurseries and childcareCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary did not say that the position comes from the Parti socialiste programme, adopted by its members on 25 June 2026, before the candidate was designated; it now specifies this.Version 3
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: flagged as partial. In the same debate (same article), the candidate announces that « certains vont partir plus tard à la retraite, les cadres supérieurs dans les grandes administrations, les grandes entreprises » [“some will retire later, senior executives in large administrations, large companies”]; this counterpart, with no age or headcount, is not costed, and the note says so. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Contribution periodCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary did not say that the position comes from the Parti socialiste programme, adopted by its members on 25 June 2026, before the candidate was designated; it now specifies this. The costing note also mentions the funding provided for in the same place, which is not counted.Version 3
Arduous workCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary left out the counterpart announced in the same passage, later retirement for « certains » [“some”], « les cadres supérieurs dans les grandes administrations, les grandes entreprises » [“senior executives in large administrations, large companies”]; quote extended to this sentence (same article), summary completed. Direction unchanged: arduous work remains better recognised.Version 2
Tax and social security expendituresCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary did not say that the position comes from the Parti socialiste programme, adopted by its members on 25 June 2026, before the candidate was designated; it now specifies this.Version 3
Tax and social security fraudCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary did not say that the position comes from the Parti socialiste programme, adopted by its members on 25 June 2026, before the candidate was designated; it now specifies this.Version 3
Inheritance and gift taxCorrected and validated by the editors: the quote stopped before the clarification that follows it in the same passage (« les 1% des plus gros héritages » [“the top 1% of the largest inheritances”]) and the announced yield of €15bn, paid back « sur la fiche de paie » [“onto the payslip”]; quote extended, summary completed, yield cited as an announced amount. The reason for not costing now mentions the abolition of the pacte Dutreil requested by Place publique on 3 February 2026, a document cited elsewhere on this page.Version 4
Corporate income taxCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary did not say that the position comes from the Parti socialiste programme, adopted by its members on 25 June 2026, before the candidate was designated; it now specifies this.Version 3
Public deficit targeted for 2032Direction of change corrected (decrease → other): the lever compares the deficit targeted in 2032 with the official path, which already provides for a deficit below 3% of GDP in 2029 (medium-term fiscal-structural plan). A « trajectoire engageante de réduction » [“binding reduction path”] over five years, with no target, does not say whether it aims lower than this path; same encoding as the position of Marine Tondelier, also with no target.Version 3
Research, share of GDPCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary did not say that the position comes from the Parti socialiste programme, adopted by its members on 25 June 2026, before the candidate was designated; it now specifies this.Version 3
Where doctors set up practiceCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary added « sans régulation contraignante » [“without binding regulation”], which the quote does not contain (it does not mention it); the Parti socialiste programme of 25 June 2026, the source of other positions on this page, on the contrary provides for regulating where self-employed doctors set up practice. The summary sticks to the Place publique text.Version 3
Public hospitalsCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary did not say that the position comes from the Parti socialiste programme, adopted by its members on 25 June 2026, before the candidate was designated; it now specifies this.Version 3
End of lifeCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary did not say that the position comes from the Parti socialiste programme, adopted by its members on 25 June 2026, before the candidate was designated; it now specifies this.Version 3
Prisons and sentencesCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary did not say that the position comes from the Parti socialiste programme, adopted by its members on 25 June 2026, before the candidate was designated; it now specifies this.Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary did not say that the position comes from the Parti socialiste programme, adopted by its members on 25 June 2026, before the candidate was designated; it now specifies this. The reason for not costing also cites the indexation of the public sector pay index point to inflation provided for by Place publique (« Acte un », 2025, p. 40), a document cited elsewhere on this page.Version 3
Public broadcastingDirection of change corrected (increase → other): the text changes the funding method, through a contribution « universelle et progressive en fonction des revenus » [“universal and progressive according to income”], with no amount; this is not a costed increase in funding, like the position of Marine Tondelier encoded as “other”. The summary also specifies that the position comes from the Parti socialiste programme, adopted on 25 June 2026, before the candidate was designated.Version 3
Electricity prices, European marketDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): the quote omitted the aim stated in the same proposal, « faire baisser les prix de l’électricité » [“bring down electricity prices”], and the next proposal on the same page, the cancellation of « la hausse de taxe sur l’électricité imposée en 2024 » [“the increase in the tax on electricity imposed in 2024”]; quote extended to these two sentences, summary completed. The text lowers the price paid, like the positions of Marine Tondelier and Fabien Roussel encoded as “decrease”. Reason for not costing completed.Version 3
Article 49.3 and revision of the ConstitutionDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): the investiture of the Prime Minister and the constructive no-confidence vote are meant to « mettre fin au 49.3 » [“put an end to Article 49.3”]; the text therefore reduces the executive’s powers over Parliament, which ↓ measures for this lever, like the position of Marine Tondelier encoded as “decrease”.Version 3
High cost of living overseasDirection of change corrected (creation → increase): the quote seeks to « aller au-delà du bouclier qualité-prix » [“go beyond the quality-price shield”], a scheme in force since the law of 20 November 2012 (Art. L. 410-5 of the Commercial Code); capping prices strengthens a public intervention that already exists. Same encoding as the positions of Marine Tondelier and Jean-Luc Mélenchon.Version 3

Marine Le Pen 16 corrections

Family allowancesCosting revised: the reason now cites the « subvention pour le troisième enfant » [“subsidy for the third child”] announced in the counter-budget of 6 October 2026 (CNews), which goes in the opposite direction to the recorded position, with no amount. Position still not costed.Version 3
Family allowancesCosting revised: the reason did not cite the savings the candidate attributes to her migration policy and to the « priorité nationale » [“national priority”] (€15bn in the first year, €29bn in a full year, 6 October 2026), with no share specific to family allowances; it now cites them. Position still not costed.Version 2
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the note omitted the financing announced in the quote itself (€15bn to €20bn of savings « à terme » [“in the long run”] on social protection, with no detail); it is now flagged, not counted, as is the overlap with the contribution period, costed separately. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Contribution periodCosting revised: the reading of 42 years required of everyone in the long run is now flagged as an assumption (« progressivement » [“gradually”] is explained neither by a timetable nor by the age at which a career starts, and the period required for retirement at 60 is not stated); the note points out that this cost does not add up exactly with that of the legal retirement age of 62. Amount unchanged.Version 3
10% allowance on pensionsCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary « Supprimer l'abattement fiscal des retraités, « une ligne rouge » » [“Abolish pensioners' tax allowance, ‘a red line’”] could be read as a proposal to abolish it; it now states the rejection of this abolition, the only meaning of the quote.Version 3
VATPosition updated on the basis of a statement of 16 September 2026: the candidate's own words (LCI), listing the energy sources concerned, replaced on 13 October 2026 those of Jean-Philippe Tanguy, RN MP (7 January 2026). On 14 October 2026, costing revised: the note now cites 0% VAT on 100 essential products, announced in the counter-budget of 6 October 2026 (franceinfo), with no published list and not counted (€3.5bn in the first year according to the Institut de l'Entreprise).Version 4
Public deficit targeted for 2032Direction of change corrected (decrease → unchanged): the trajectory in force (medium-term fiscal-structural plan 2025-2029, confirmed by the April 2026 progress report) already brings the deficit below 3% of GDP by 2029 and sets no target for 2032. Common rule of the lever: a target between 2.5% and 3%, or « sous 3 % » [“below 3%”], cannot be distinguished from this trajectory (unchanged); below 2.5%, decrease; above 3%, increase; with no figure, other. The ceiling of 2.9% in 2032 is within this margin, like the positions of Gabriel Attal and Nicolas Dupont-Aignan; the candidate's timetable (3.9% in 2030, 3.4% in 2031) remains slower than the trajectory, which targets less than 3% from 2029.Version 3
Announced savingsCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary said the end of « la plupart » [“most”] of the agencies, the quote says « la quasi-totalité » [“almost all”]; the reason for not costing now cites what is announced in the opposite direction at the same conference (€30bn of tax cuts, €15bn of spending on new rights), omitted until now.Version 2
State grants to local authoritiesCosting revised: the reason ignored the local authorities' contribution to the 2027 effort, put at €8.2bn in the same article; it now cites it, with no share attributable to state transfers. Position still not costed.Version 2
Social housingDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): repealing the SRU law removes the obligation on municipalities to have 20 to 25% social housing, and selling HLM shrinks the stock, i.e. weaker obligations in the sense of the lever (the abolition of the same obligation by David Lisnard is encoded as “abolition”); priority access for French nationals does not change the number of homes.Version 3
Industrial aid and reshoringDirection of change corrected (increase → other): the lever measures public aid to industry. Common rule: “increase” when the text adds public money for industry (subsidy, targeted tax expenditure, public aid or investment fund); “other” for a rule with no public money announced (preference in public procurement, trade protection, conditions attached to aid, relocation target with no instrument). Public procurement « fléchée » [“steered”] towards companies established in France redirects existing purchases: same encoding as the positions of Raphaël Glucksmann (local purchasing index) and Gabriel Attal (European preference). The « choc de compétitivité fiscale » [“tax competitiveness shock”], with no specified content, does not target industry in particular.Version 2
Labour immigration and residence permitsPosition updated on the basis of a statement of 6 October 2026: the tax of 1,000 euros a year on hiring a non-European employee, included in the counter-budget presented by the candidate, concerns labour immigration itself; it replaces the remarks of Jordan Bardella, president of the RN (3 September 2026), on ending family reunification, which falls under family immigration.Version 3
Right of asylumCosting revised: the reason now cites the proposed constitutional law « Citoyenneté-Identité-Immigration » tabled by the candidate on 25 January 2024, which specifies this « durcissement » [“tightening”] (applications lodged outside the territory); older than the recorded position, it does not replace it. Position still not costed.Version 3
Defence budgetCosting revised: the objective comes from an amendment by RN MPs, rejected on 4 May 2026, which the candidate did not sign; it gives no level for 2032, and the budget trajectory she presented on 6 October 2026 gives none in the reports read. The €18.4bn counted by reading 3% as the 2032 level is removed: position not costed.Version 3
High cost of living overseasDirection of change corrected (abolition → other): the lever measures public intervention on prices; abolishing the octroi de mer, a tax, while redirecting state savings towards the overseas territories, does not abolish this intervention. Same encoding as the positions of Nicolas Dupont-Aignan and Édouard Philippe on the octroi de mer.Version 3
Secularism (laïcité)Corrected and validated by the editors: the summary omitted « progressivement » [“gradually”], which the quote contains, and « d'abord par décret » [“first by decree”] placed the decree before the law, whereas it is published « juste après » [“just after”] the vote; summary aligned with the quote.Version 2

David Lisnard 29 corrections

Reductions in social contributions on low wagesPosition updated following a statement of 21 January 2026: the €120bn cut in contributions returned to working people as net pay (« environ 400 euros de plus par mois » [“about 400 euros more per month”]), the candidate's flagship measure announced in a video interview of 21 January 2026, repeated on 30 June 2026 (Cercle ETHIC) and on the programme page updated on 3 October 2026, replaces the abolition of charges for private household employers at the SMIC level and negative employer charges for hiring RSA recipients (programme « Réussir une nouvelle ambition française »), more targeted measures now cited in the note. Costed at €120bn a year using the amount parameter, like Bruno Retailleau's €30bn cut.Version 3
Automatic payment, single social allowanceCorrected and validated by the editors: the date of the Saint-Raphaël rally was wrong (3 July 2026); the cited page dates it 4 July 2026. Direction of change unchanged.Version 3
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the source does not give the timetable for the rise to 65 (« impératif national urgent » [“urgent national imperative”], with no generation or date). The central value of the option (€8.4bn in 2035) assumes the accelerated increase of the Cour des comptes (Court of Audit) (generations born 1964 to 1968); at the current pace, the gain would be €4.7bn in 2035. Position marked as an assumption, note rewritten. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Special pension schemes, points-based systemDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): a single public agency that « remplacera tous les organismes actuels » [“will replace all current bodies”] unifies the system, which “decrease” measures under the lever's rule (↓: more unified); same direction as the position of Gabriel Attal (universal system). The quote stopped before these words, which the summary took up: it is extended within the same sentence.Version 3
Funded shareDirection of change corrected (increase → creation): the compulsory scheme is currently pay-as-you-go (excluding the RAFP); a compulsory funded tier fed by contributions is a new pillar, as with Édouard Philippe and Bruno Retailleau, encoded as “creation”. The reason for not costing said the timetable was not given: the same source gives a transition « par tranches successives, soit environ 8 tranches » [“in successive tranches, i.e. about 8 tranches”], towards €116bn of funded pensions (about 40% of the total). Quote extended within the same source (pay-as-you-go base, transition), summary and reason rewritten.Version 3
Income tax scaleCorrected and validated by the editors: the quote stopped before the counterpart given in the same op-ed, « En contrepartie, un nombre substantiel de niches seraient abrogées » [“In return, a substantial number of tax expenditures would be repealed”]; quote extended to this sentence. The summary said nothing about the reduced rate on capital or the repealed tax expenditures: it has been rewritten, and the reason for not costing completed. Direction of change unchanged (other: reduced rates, tax expenditures repealed, net balance not stated).Version 3
Inheritance and gift taxCorrected and validated by the editors: the programme quote (« la réforme des droits de succession sur les entreprises » [“the reform of inheritance tax on businesses”]) stated neither the direction nor the content of the reform, which the summary described as an “easing”. The candidate's op-ed of 16 April 2026, already cited for other positions, specifies it: abolition of inheritance tax in the direct line, liberalised gifts, low-rate proportional tax maintained in the indirect and collateral line. Quote and source replaced by this op-ed, summary and reason for not costing rewritten. Direction of change unchanged (decrease).Version 3
VATDirection of change corrected (other → increase): the reduced rates (2.1%, 5.5% and 10%) would be merged into a 12.5% rate, the standard 20% rate remaining unchanged; no rate falls, VAT becomes heavier. The counterpart given in the same sentence (about €25bn less in charges on labour) now appears in the summary and in the reason for not costing.Version 3
Taxes on fuel and energyCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary omitted « provisoirement » [“temporarily”]; the quote proposes a temporary suspension of energy savings certificates. Direction of change unchanged.Version 3
Production taxesCosting revised: the note now flags the broader target announced since January 2026 on the candidate's website, a €40bn cut in production taxes « à commencer par » [“starting with”] the abolition of the C3S, funded by savings; beyond the C3S, the taxes targeted are not named: this surplus is not costed. Amount unchanged.Version 4
Announced savingsCosting revised: the reason described the targeted items as “with no amount”; the cited page gives the announced pace, « 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”]. This amount is now cited alongside the totals, without being counted: it is an overall target, which is compared with the sum of the costed measures.Version 3
Handling of the debtDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): the same page commits to « la baisse de la dette publique par rapport au PIB » [“reducing public debt relative to GDP”], a sentence that precedes the quote and that the summary already took up; quote extended to this sentence and to the end of the next one (« ou de son non-remboursement » [“or not repaying it”]). Same encoding as the positions of Raphaël Glucksmann (debt reduction trajectory) and Marine Le Pen, as “decrease”.Version 3
Teachers' payCosting revised: the note now flags the counterpart set out in the same sentence (increase « conditionnée à une réorganisation profonde » [“conditional on a thorough reorganisation”]: stronger presence in the school, compulsory continuing training, regular evaluation), not costed. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Funding of private schoolsCosting revised: the quote omitted the abolition of school catchment rules, the flagship measure of the Éducation section, set out in the preceding sentence on the same page, before free choice of school and the education voucher; quote extended to that sentence and to the start of the next one, summary completed. The reason for not costing now states that abolishing school catchment rules has no direct budgetary cost and that the programme presents the education voucher as « neutre financièrement pour les budgets publics » [“financially neutral for public budgets”]. Direction of change unchanged.Version 4
Funding of private schoolsCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary omitted that the education voucher would be introduced « progressivement » [“gradually”]; quote extended to the start of the same sentence, summary completed. Direction of change unchanged.Version 3
Access to higher educationDirection of change corrected (abolition → other): common rule of the lever, which measures selection at entry to higher education: “abolition” when the text ends selection (guaranteed access without selection, as with Jean-Luc Mélenchon); abolishing or replacing the Parcoursup platform without saying whether selection disappears, is strengthened or is eased is “other”, as with Olivier Becht and Marine Tondelier. The text abolishes Parcoursup without saying what replaces it or whether entry to university ceases to be selective.Version 3
Public hospitalsCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary (mayors chairing hospitals) took up the end of the sentence, cut short in the quote; quote extended within the same sentence, summary clarified (chairing of boards of directors). Direction of change unchanged.Version 3
Social housingDirection of change corrected (abolition → decrease): the position abolishes the obligation under Article 55 of the SRU law, not social housing; same encoding as the positions of Marine Le Pen (repeal of the SRU law) and Bruno Retailleau (end of SRU quotas), as “decrease”. Quote extended within the same source to the replacement scheme envisaged, omitted until now (« peut-être de façon transitoire » [“perhaps on a transitional basis”], a target on the flow of construction, capped); summary and reason completed.Version 3
Police and gendarmerie numbersCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary said “without an increase”, which the source does not say (the programme also provides for a « plan massif de remise à niveau de la police nationale » [“massive plan to upgrade the national police”] over ten years, with no staffing figures); it now takes up the objective as written. Reason for not costing completed. Direction of change unchanged.Version 3
Prisons and sentencesPosition updated following a statement of 4 July 2026: at the Saint-Raphaël rally, the candidate pledges to build twenty thousand prison places (« Nous construirons enfin les vingt mille places de prison » [“We will finally build the twenty thousand prison places”], quoted on the site's page « Quel candidat propose de construire des places de prison ? »), to have sentences served in full and to introduce whole-life imprisonment; this costed pledge replaces the minimum sentences for repeat offenders and the end of automatic sentence reductions (programme, Sécurité page), now cited in the note. Costed with the prison places parameter.Version 4
Prisons and sentencesCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary cited the end of automatic sentence reductions, which was absent from the quote; quote extended within the same sentence of the source. Direction of change unchanged.Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: the reason now cites the more recent commitment from the Saint-Raphaël rally (4 July 2026) to no longer replace « l’ensemble des cinq cent mille départs annuels » [“all of the five hundred thousand annual departures”], starting with administrative functions; with no replacement rate, it cannot be costed. Quote, direction of change and summary unchanged.Version 4
Numbers and pay of civil servantsDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): the sentence, cut short in the quote, gives the objective (« faire basculer 450 000 fonctionnaires des bureaux vers le terrain » [“shifting 450,000 civil servants from offices to the field”]) and « la réduction de la masse salariale » [“reducing the pay bill”]; quote extended to these words. The summary read the 33% and 25% as a share of the staff's work, whereas the source refers to the share of staff numbers: it has been rewritten, and the reason completed. Same direction as the positions of Édouard Philippe and Bruno Retailleau (departures not replaced), as “decrease”.Version 3
New nuclear reactorsDirection of change corrected (other → increase): common rule of the lever, the PPE3 in force commits to six EPR2s (eight as an option) and no deployment of small reactors; a commitment to build beyond that, in EPRs or in small modular reactors, is an increase, even without a number. In addition to a « première série de six EPR » [“first series of six EPRs”], the text commits to « déployer des mini-réacteurs pour renouveler le parc de première génération » [“deploy mini-reactors to renew the first-generation fleet”]: same encoding as the position of Nicolas Dupont-Aignan (small modular reactors deployed to replace end-of-life power plants). The value 6, which counts only the EPRs, is withdrawn: the total number of reactors is not given. Costing: the six-EPR2 parameter (zero cost) is replaced by a non-costing, the mini-reactors having neither number nor timetable.Version 3
Free trade agreements (Mercosur)Direction of change corrected (other → decrease): mandatory mirror clauses provide protection against imports, which is what “decrease” measures under the lever's rule (↓: refusal, protections); same encoding as the positions of Gabriel Attal (mirror clauses in all agreements), Bruno Retailleau (reciprocity clauses) and Raphaël Glucksmann (mirror measures).Version 3
Citizens' initiative referendum (RIC)Direction of change corrected (other → increase): the shared-initiative referendum (RIP) already exists (Article 11); making it « praticable » [“workable”], with an attainable signature threshold and a guaranteed vote, and lifting the subject limits of Article 11 broaden citizens' initiative. Same encoding as the position of Bruno Retailleau (Article 11 broadened, RIP threshold halved), as “increase”. Quote extended, within the same page of the speech, to the sentence on Article 11; summary completed.Version 3
Article 49.3 and revision of the ConstitutionCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary said “revise the Constitution directly by referendum”; the source says that the Constitution « doit pouvoir, à terme » [“must eventually be able to”] be so revised. Summary brought back to the quote. Direction of change unchanged.Version 3
Labour immigration and residence permitsCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary cited quotas for skilled labour, which were absent from the quote; quote extended to the next line of the same page. Direction of change unchanged.Version 3
Status and autonomy of the territoriesCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary (“same local freedoms everywhere”) took up the two sentences preceding the quote, which were absent from it; quote extended to these sentences, same page of the same speech. Direction of change unchanged.Version 3

Jean-Luc Mélenchon 41 corrections

Net monthly SMIC (minimum wage)Position updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: SMIC at €1,700 net (at around 0:38:31 in the video), instead of €1,600 net in L'Avenir en commun (2025 edition, p. 35); costed at €1,700. Indexing wages to inflation, provided for in the same sentence of the programme, remains recorded on its own lever.Version 3
Profit sharing (participation, intéressement)Costing revised: quote extended to the proposal on p. 38 of the same programme (pension funding), omitted until now, which makes profit-sharing, employee profit participation and employee savings subject to contributions; it is costed through the option of base exemptions for financial participation (€3.7bn net), as for Marine Tondelier. The dividend cap (p. 35) remains not costed. Position to be reread.Version 3
Benefit amount and taperingPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the repeal of « toutes les réformes sur les droits à l'assurance chômage » [“all the reforms on unemployment insurance entitlements”] is costed by the candidate at €3bn; announced amount added, quote and costing unchanged.Version 3
Statutory working timeCorrected and validated by the editors: the value 35 h, which is the legal working time currently in force (Code du travail (Labour Code), art. L3121-27), was displayed with a decrease arrow, as if legal working time were falling for everyone; value removed, the decrease applying to the 32 hours in arduous or night-work jobs and their extension to all through collective bargaining. The summary puts these 32 hours first; the overtime premium falls under its own lever.Version 4
Minimum income for under-25sPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the autonomy guarantee targets « tous les jeunes en formation » [“all young people in education or training”], as a top-up up to the poverty line, and no longer the young people detached from their parents' tax household of L'Avenir en commun (2025 edition, p. 42); announced cost: €9.5bn. Jean-Luc Mélenchon, at the same conference (around 0:25:46), speaks of an « allocation jeune » [“youth allowance”] which, « après récupération des autres allocations, leur donne 1300 euros par mois » [“after the other allowances are taken back, gives them 1,300 euros a month”]. Quote replaced; position still not costed.Version 3
Automatic payment, single social allowanceCosting revised: the reading of a take-up raised to 100% for the RSA and the in-work benefit (prime d'activité), upper bound of the effect of automation, is now flagged as an assumption, as for Marine Tondelier; the text in fact says « proposer l'automatisation » [“propose automation”]. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Legal retirement agePosition updated following a statement of 27 August 2026: « dans un premier temps à 62 ans » [“initially at 62”], then 60, instead of the direct return to 60 in L'Avenir en commun (2025 edition, p. 38); costed at 62. On 14 October 2026, costing revised: Éric Coquerel announces a cost of €9bn for the return to 62, with the return to 60 « dans le reste du quinquennat » [“in the rest of the five-year term”], financed by contributions; announced amount added, not included in the total.Version 4
Contribution periodCosting revised: the reason said that contributions on profit-sharing (intéressement, participation) and employee savings were not counted; they now are, on the “Profit sharing (participation, intéressement)” lever (option of base exemptions for financial participation schemes, €3.7bn net), where the quote from p. 38 has been included. The rest of the financing planned on the same page remains uncounted. Position still not costed.Version 4
Contribution periodCosting revised: the reason was silent on the pension financing planned on the same page; it now cites it. It is not counted: the grid has no lever for old-age contributions, and contributions on employee savings are not included in the programme's position on value sharing (p. 35, dividend cap).Version 3
Flat-rate levy on capital (flat tax)Position updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the abolition of the flat tax is costed by the candidate at €9bn of revenue per year; announced amount added, quote and costing unchanged.Version 4
Flat-rate levy on capital (flat tax)Direction of change corrected (abolition → increase): the lever measures the weight of the levy on capital income; abolishing the flat-rate levy so as to tax this income under the progressive scale, like income from work, makes it heavier (the costing in fact counts revenue). « Suppression » [“abolition”] read as a tax cut. Same direction as the positions of Raphaël Glucksmann and Marine Tondelier.Version 3
Tax and social security expendituresPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the conference names the tax expenditures to « raboter » [“trim”] and puts the yield at €22bn, where L'Avenir en commun (2025 edition, p. 28) set out the principle with no list or amount (abolish unfair tax expenditures, turn tax reductions into tax credits). Quote replaced; position still not costed.Version 4
Tax and social security expendituresCosting revised: the reason described the targeted tax expenditures as « sans liste » [“with no list”]; the programme names several of them elsewhere (research tax credit p. 24, tourist furnished lettings p. 31, tax advantages of savings invested abroad p. 39, kerosene p. 39). The reason cites them and says why they are not counted here. Position still not costed.Version 3
Tax and social security fraudPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: yield of the fight against fraud announced at €2bn in the first year, more afterwards with the recruitment at the DGFiP; announced amount added, quote unchanged, position still not costed.Version 3
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Position updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the minimum tax (« taxe Zucman ») now targets assets of more than €100m (« centi-millionnaires » [“centi-millionaires”]) and no longer only the billionaires of L'Avenir en commun (2025 edition, p. 27); announced yields: €10bn for the climate ISF, €15bn for the Zucman tax. The minimum tax is now costed through the cost schedule option (assets of more than €100m), in addition to the return of the ISF.Version 4
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Direction of change corrected (creation → increase): a wealth tax already exists, the IFI, which replaced the ISF in 2018; restoring and strengthening the ISF makes the taxation of wealth heavier, like Fabien Roussel's position (« rétablir l'ISF » [“restore the ISF”]) encoded as “increase”. Costing revised: the position was not costed even though the option « rétablir l'ISF » (2017 base, net gain over the IFI) corresponds to its first term and is counted for Fabien Roussel; it is now costed as a floor (€4.5bn), as an assumption and in part. Summary: « ISF climatique rétabli » [“climate ISF restored”] did not render « rétablir et renforcer » [“restore and strengthen”].Version 3
Inheritance and gift taxPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the conference sets the exemption at €150,000 of inheritance, confirms the €12m ceiling (« au-dessus de 12 millions d'euros, nous prenons tout » [“above 12 million euros, we take everything”], around 1:11:37, in answer to a question) and puts the yield at €20bn; the progressivity is « pas finalisée » [“not finalised”]. L'Avenir en commun (2025 edition, p. 27) also provided for counting gifts and inheritances received over a lifetime, which the conference does not repeat. Quote replaced; position still not costed.Version 3
VATCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary presented the decrease and the « TVA grand luxe » [“top-luxury VAT”] as two separate measures; the quote says that the second funds the first.Version 3
Corporate income taxPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the progressive scale of L'Avenir en commun (2025 edition, p. 27), with no rates, now has its bounds (current rate for very small, small and medium-sized enterprises, up to 33% for large companies) and an announced yield (€3bn). Direction of change corrected (other → increase): the rate rises for large companies and remains unchanged for small ones. The criterion of the use of profits (investment rather than dividends), provided for by the programme, is not repeated. Quote replaced; position still not costed.Version 3
Windfall profits and share buybacksPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the conference adds a 10% tax on share cancellations (share buybacks), announced at €2.5bn, and a tax on Total « au niveau des raffineries » [“at refinery level”] against the rise in fuel prices (around 0:38:46), with no amount; announced amount added, programme quote unchanged, position still not costed.Version 3
Level of public spendingPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: €81.7bn of new spending in 2027, funded by new revenue that would reduce the deficit by €25bn (the revenue total, probably €106.4bn, is in a poorly transcribed passage around 0:54:00 and is not cited), where the interview of 9 October 2026 (Centre Presse) gave the direction with no amount (« Ma politique, c'est celle de la demande […] Mon plan, c'est la relance écologique et sociale » [“My policy is demand-side policy […] My plan is the ecological and social recovery”]). The budget presented applies to 2027 only; the five-year trajectory will be published later in the campaign. Quote replaced; position still not costed.Version 3
Handling of the debtPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: cancelling (« un trait à rayer » [“a line to strike out”]) the French debt held by the ECB, instead of converting it into perpetual zero-rate debt as in L'Avenir en commun (2025 edition, p. 27), and allocating €25bn of the 2027 budget to reducing the debt (Éric Coquerel speaks of €25bn of deficit reduction, €13bn after the increase in interest charges). Éric Coquerel specifies (around 0:59:05) that the ECB must first be asked to roll over the securities it is letting mature (« elle ne fera plus que de 464 milliards d'euros » [“it will only amount to 464 billion euros”] at the end of the year), then « nous proposons effectivement d'annuler cette dette » [“we do indeed propose cancelling this debt”], seeking a European solution, failing that with the countries concerned, or even a national one (« ce n'est pas ce que nous préconisons » [“that is not what we recommend”]). Direction of change corrected (other → decrease): cancellation reduces the debt. Quote replaced.Version 3
Fiscal rulesDirection of change corrected (abolition → decrease): the text targets the European budget rules, not the national framework (organic law on public finances, programming laws, Haut Conseil des finances publiques), about which it says nothing; the rules become less binding without disappearing. Same direction as Marine Tondelier's position on the Stability Pact.Version 3
University tuition feesCosting revised: the abolition of the CVEC (student life contribution), a proposal that immediately follows on the same page, had been omitted; quote extended to this sentence, summary completed, and the « suppression de la CVEC » option (€0.17bn) added to free enrolment fees, as for Marine Tondelier. The cost of the position rises from €0.5bn to €0.67bn.Version 3
Student supportDirection of change corrected (increase → unchanged): the direction contradicted the costing, which counts a status quo; the €1 meal has been open to all students since 4 May 2026, after the publication of the programme (January 2025). The summary specifies this.Version 3
Research, share of GDPCosting revised: the reason did not mention the abolition of the research tax credit provided for on the same page « au profit du financement des universités et instituts de recherche » [“in favour of funding universities and research institutes”]; it now cites it, and says why neither the gain nor the spending is counted. Position still not costed.Version 3
Public hospitalsPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: an amount (€3bn) and staff numbers (10,000 care staff) where L'Avenir en commun (2025 edition, p. 56) said « reconstruire le service public hospitalier » [“rebuild the public hospital service”] with no figure; costed on this €3bn. The programme's « 100 % Sécu », which concerns the reimbursement of care and not hospital resources, is no longer in the quote. Quote replaced.Version 3
Personal housing benefits (APL)Position updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the 10% increase in housing benefit (APL) is confirmed and costed by the candidate together with the indexation of pensions and social benefits (€8bn for the whole); announced amount added, quote and costing unchanged.Version 3
Emergency shelterPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: a plan costed at €3bn (emergency accommodation built, requisitioned buildings made habitable) where L'Avenir en commun (2025 edition, p. 30) aimed at « zéro sans-abri » [“zero homeless”] through a « significative » [“significant”] increase in places, with no number. Quote replaced; position still not costed.Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the increase in the public sector pay index point is costed by the candidate at €17bn; announced amount added, quote and costing unchanged. The conference also announces 10,000 posts in national education (€0.5bn) and 10,000 care staff in hospitals (“Public hospitals” lever).Version 3
Public broadcastingCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary said « recréer » [“recreate”]; the text says « instaurer » [“introduce”] a dedicated, universal and progressive contribution, which is not the licence fee abolished in 2022 (flat-rate).Version 3
Wind and solarCosting revised: the reason described the target as « sans échéance » [“with no deadline”]; the title of the same section, on the same page, sets it at 2050. Quote extended to this title, summary completed; position still not costed, for lack of a volume or a milestone for 2032.Version 3
Electricity prices, European marketDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): quote extended to two proposals from the same programme omitted until now, the cancellation of gas tariff increases since 2017 (p. 50) and the freezing of energy and fuel prices, a key measure of the state of social emergency (p. 38); they aim at lower prices. Reason for not costing completed. Position to be reread.Version 3
Free trade agreements (Mercosur)Corrected and validated by the editors: the summary only retained the veto on new agreements; the same page provides for « abroger les accords de libre-échange en vigueur » [“repealing the free trade agreements in force”] (New Zealand, Canada, Japan). Quote extended to this sentence, summary completed; direction unchanged.Version 3
Additional public investment, per yearPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: an annual pace (€100bn of savings channelled each year, €500bn of investment over five years) where L'Avenir en commun (2025 edition, p. 49) announced a €200bn plan with no duration. Funding: livret A ceiling raised to €30,000 (€30bn to €40bn), greater centralisation, strengthened livret B, life insurance made less advantageous if necessary. Jean-Luc Mélenchon, at the same conference (around 0:25:59): « comme il s'agit de 100 milliards dans le premier budget » [“since it is a matter of 100 billion in the first budget”]. Quote replaced; position still not costed.Version 4
Additional public investment, per yearCosting revised: the reason did not mention the funding provided for on the same page (cancelling « les cadeaux fiscaux accordés sans contrepartie aux plus grandes entreprises ces dix dernières années » [“the tax gifts granted without anything in return to the largest companies over the last ten years”] and « utiliser cet argent pour investir » [“using this money to invest”]); it now cites it. Position still not costed.Version 3
Length and number of terms of officeDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): the lever measures longer or more combinable terms of office; a ban on multiple office-holding extended to successive terms (« dans le temps » [“over time”]) makes them less combinable, like François Ruffin's position on combining the office of minister with a local executive office, encoded as “decrease”.Version 3
Place in the European UnionPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: reduce the French contribution to the EU budget by about €9bn (net balance), a « rapport de force » [“show of strength”] not counted in the budget presented; announced amount added, quote unchanged, position still not costed.Version 4
Place in the European UnionCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary cited a plan B (« désobéissance sinon » [“disobedience otherwise”]) that the quote did not contain; quote extended to the sentence that defines it, further on in the same passage (pp. 65-66), and summary rewritten in its terms: plan B applies « dans tous les cas » [“in all cases”], not only if plan A fails.Version 3
High cost of living overseasDirection of change corrected (creation → increase): public intervention on prices already exists in the overseas territories (quality-price shield of the law of 20 November 2012, Art. L. 410-5 of the Commercial Code; prices that can be regulated by decree, Art. L. 410-2); regulating prices and margins strengthens it. Same encoding as the positions of Marine Tondelier and Raphaël Glucksmann (« aller au-delà du bouclier qualité-prix » [“go beyond the quality-price shield”]).Version 3
Secularism (laïcité)Direction of change corrected (abolition → increase): the Concordat and the statutes of religions in the overseas territories are derogations from the 1905 law; repealing them extends the separation of Churches and State to these territories, i.e. an increase under the lever rule (religious neutrality extended). « Suppression » [“abolition”] read as a step back for secularism (laïcité).Version 3

Édouard Philippe 21 corrections

Statutory working timeCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary said « inciter » [“encourage”], a word absent from the source, which does not say by what means (legal working time, overtime, agreements) the two hours would be worked; it now restates the proposal as reported, with the announced gain of €1,000 a year. Direction unchanged.Version 3
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the note said the timetable was not stated; the same source gives it (first restore the 2023 reform, 64, then reach 65 « en moins de dix ans » [“in less than ten years”]). This pace is close to the Court’s slow scenario (65 for the 1968 to 1972 generations: €4.7bn in 2035), not to the accelerated rise that gives the option its central value (€8.4bn); the note flags this. Amount unchanged, for lack of an option at this pace in the cost schedule.Version 3
Long careersCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary said « partira » [“will retire”], the source « pourra partir » [“will be able to retire”]: a possibility opened up, not an actual departure.Version 2
Funded sharePosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the « Pour une France plus prospère » page of the campaign website, reread today, no longer contains the « pilier de capitalisation à 10-15 % des pensions d'ici quinze ans » [“funded pillar at 10-15% of pensions within fifteen years”] (still present in the copy archived on web.archive.org on 5 October 2026); it now announces collective funded pensions for all employees and a first payment of €500 from the State at the first job. Quote, summary and reason for not costing replaced; direction unchanged (creation).Version 3
Funded shareDirection of change corrected (increase → creation): the position quoted remarks reported by LCP (« un système différent, mixte, qui associera répartition et capitalisation » [“a different, mixed system, which will combine pay-as-you-go and funding”]), whereas the campaign website, already the source of other positions, puts a figure on the target: « créer un pilier de capitalisation à 10-15 % des pensions d'ici quinze ans » [“create a funded pillar at 10-15% of pensions within fifteen years”]. Primary source substituted, summary and reason for not costing corrected (the reason said the share was unspecified). As the compulsory scheme has no funded pillar, the measure creates one: same encoding as Bruno Retailleau’s funded share.Version 2
Income tax scaleCosting revised: the campaign website details the measure announced on L'Heure de vérité (income tax exemption during the child’s first three years for households paying less than €3,000, a €3,000 reduction above that) and its cost, €3bn a year, now cited next to the total without being counted. Position still not costed.Version 3
Public aid to businessesCosting revised: the announced amount (€50bn less in subsidies) is now cited next to the total, without being counted, and the reason recalls that it is the counterpart of the €50bn cut in production taxes recorded under the other lever. Position still not costed.Version 3
Inheritance and gift taxCorrected and validated by the editors: the quote stopped before the clarification given in the same source, « une augmentation très sensible des plafonds pendant les trois premières années du quinquennat » [“a very significant increase in the ceilings during the first three years of the five-year term”]; quote extended to these words, summary completed. The reason for not costing said « ni délai » [“no time frame”], whereas the duration is given: it is corrected. Direction unchanged.Version 4
Production taxesCosting revised: the reason said the counterpart (€50bn less in subsidies) had not been recorded; it has been since 13 October 2026 under the “Public aid to businesses” lever, also not costed. The announced amount is now cited next to the total, without being counted: the period (per year or over the five-year term) and the list of taxes concerned are not given.Version 4
Public deficit targeted for 2032Position updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the campaign website page, rewritten between 5 and 14 October 2026, no longer carries the sentence quoted until now; quote taken from the current text, which adds the referendum and no longer cites Germany or the Netherlands. Target unchanged, 2% of GDP at the end of the five-year term: below the current trajectory (2.5-3%), hence the direction “decrease”, value 2.Version 4
Announced savingsCosting revised: the reason now cites the waiting days for sick pay (« 3 jours de carence pour tout le monde, dans le privé comme le public » [“3 waiting days for everyone, in the private sector as in the public sector”], campaign website), a savings measure with no lever of its own in the grid and no announced amount. Position still not costed.Version 2
Teachers' payCosting revised: the note now flags the funding announced in the same source (the fall in the number of pupils, « près d'un million d'élèves en moins » [“almost a million fewer pupils”], would allow the increase « sans dégrader les finances publiques » [“without damaging the public finances”]), omitted until now and not costed. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Prisons and sentencesPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the campaign website page, reread today, extends minimum sentences to attacks against « les professeurs » [“teachers”]; quote taken from the current text. Direction unchanged.Version 3
Adaptation to climate changePosition reclassified from the « investissement-public » lever to « adaptation-climat » (lever created on 14 October 2026): the fund brings together the major natural hazards prevention fund (Barnier fund) and the Fonds vert for adaptation to climate change, the exact subject of the new lever; the position carries no other investment measure. The reason for not costing is restated based on the cost schedule of the new lever, which records the appropriations of the Barnier fund but not the total of the Fonds vert.Version 4
Adaptation to climate changePosition updated following a statement of 17 September 2026: the single fund for adaptation to climate change of €2bn a year, presented at Les Ponts-de-Cé (Maine-et-Loire) and taken up on the campaign website, replaces a principle with no amount (« des infrastructures qui ne peuvent pas être décidées par des entreprises privées » [“infrastructure that cannot be decided by private companies”], LCP, 27 August 2026). The Fonds vert is placed under the same lever for Marine Tondelier.Version 3
New nuclear reactorsPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the campaign website page, reread today (copy archived on web.archive.org on 14 October 2026), now puts a number on the relaunch: « lancement de 8 EPR supplémentaires en plus des 6 déjà prévus » [“launch of 8 additional EPRs on top of the 6 already planned”]; the archived copy of 5 October 2026 gave no number. Direction corrected accordingly (other → increase), value 14: same encoding as the positions of Gabriel Attal, Bruno Retailleau and Éric Zemmour.Version 3
Wind and solarPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the campaign website page, rewritten between 5 and 14 October 2026, no longer carries the sentence quoted until now; quote taken from the current text, which inserts the number of EPRs (recorded under the « nucléaire » lever) without changing anything on renewables. Direction unchanged: « en développant les renouvelables » [“by developing renewables”], with no pace or target.Version 4
Wind and solarDirection of change corrected (increase → unchanged): the lever measures faster development than under current law; « en développant les renouvelables » [“by developing renewables”], with no pace or target, does not announce it. Same encoding as Fabien Roussel’s position (« développer la production des énergies solaire et éolienne » [“develop the production of solar and wind energy”]), encoded “unchanged”.Version 3
Labour immigration and residence permitsPosition updated following a statement of 8 October 2026: the objective of « diviser par deux l'immigration » [“halving immigration”], announced on L'Heure de vérité, and the suspension of family reunification for the five-year term now appear on the same page of the campaign website (reread on 14 October 2026; the archived copy of 5 October 2026 said « Restreindre l'immigration familiale » [“Restrict family immigration”]): quote extended, summary completed. Direction unchanged (creation of quotas), as for Gabriel Attal.Version 3
Right of asylumPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: the « Pour une France plus sûre » page of the campaign website, reread today, carries national measures (list of safe countries voted each year by Parliament, end of « l'asile à vie » [“asylum for life”]) and extends to Guyane the suspension of the registration of applications, recorded until now only for Mayotte (LCP, 20 August 2026). More representative position, same direction.Version 2
Defence budgetPosition updated following a statement of 14 October 2026: on the campaign website page reread today, the quoted sentence now reads « LPM (Loi de programmation militaire) » [“LPM (Military Programming Act)”]; the quote is extended with the numerical targets on the same page (reservists from 45,000 to 250,000, voluntary military service from 3,000 to 50,000 places a year), already present in the archived copy of 5 October 2026.Version 3

Bruno Retailleau 27 corrections

Reductions in social contributions on low wagesCorrected and validated by the editors: the announced amount cited only « entre 28,5 et 31,7 milliards d'euros par an » [“between 28.5 and 31.7 billion euros a year”], which is the total of the savings meant to finance the cut (unemployment insurance, single social account and fraud, corporate income tax, incentive income) and not its cost; it is now presented as such, alongside the announced cost of €30bn. Quotation extended, same page, to the split between employees and businesses, which the summary now states. Costed amount unchanged.Version 4
In-work benefit (prime d'activité)Direction of change corrected (abolition → other): the prime d'activité disappears as such, but the incentive income that replaces it continues to be paid in work, reduced by 30% of the wage and up to €1,833 of earned income (same measure); more or less favourable depending on wage and family situation, it reads neither as an increase nor as an abolition. Quotation extended, same page; the reason said the schedule was not given, whereas the measure gives it.Version 3
Profit sharing (participation, intéressement)Costing revised: the overhaul of the forfait social announced in measure no. 34 (« refonte du forfait social (2,8 milliards) » [“overhaul of the forfait social (2.8 billion)”]; « l'intéressement, la part supra-légale et l'épargne retraite individuelle en seraient exonérés » [“profit-sharing, the above-statutory share and individual retirement savings would be exempt from it”]), more costly than abolishing the employer contribution on employee share ownership and on the same lever, was cited only in the note to the “Production taxes” position; it is now cited here too, in the announced amount and the reason. The position, taken from a more recently updated measure (24 September against 11 September 2026), is kept; still not costed.Version 4
Unemployment, work period required to qualify for benefitsCosting revised: the gain announced for measure no. 29 as a whole (€12.5bn to €15.7bn a year) is no longer cited here but only once, with its breakdown, on the « durée d'indemnisation » (benefit duration) position; the candidate announces no amount for the recharging of entitlements alone. Position still not costed.Version 4
Unemployment, max. benefit durationCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary highlighted the end of entitlements after three refused offers, which falls under the obligations lever, and left out the six-month limit on benefits after negotiated terminations, which shortens the duration; the gain announced in the same measure (€4bn to €5bn a year for the June 2024 rules, €7bn to €8bn for negotiated terminations) is now cited. Position still not costed.Version 3
Obligations of jobseekersDirection of change corrected (other → increase): under current law, two refusals of a reasonable job offer without legitimate reason lead to removal from the register and withdrawal of the allowance for a limited period, after which remaining entitlements may resume. The measure does not repeal this rule and adds the end of benefit payments at the third refusal: the penalty is made heavier (loss of entitlements, not suspension), which the lever rule counts as an increase; the same page presents the measure as a tightening (« Après trois offres raisonnables refusées, l'indemnisation s'arrête » [“After three reasonable offers refused, benefit payments stop”]).Version 3
OvertimeCorrected and validated by the editors: the quotation was limited to the title of the measure; it is extended, same page, to its commitment (threshold of 1,623 hours a year, employee and employer contributions abolished beyond it, CSG, CRDS and tax exemption maintained), on which the summary is based. Source name aligned with the title of the measure; the announced amount now cites the €4.3bn of contributions given back on overtime already worked, which the candidate says is offset by the sixteen extra hours of work.Version 4
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary said « +250 € avec activité » [“+€250 with activity”], whereas the €250 is added from fifteen hours of training or job seeking (in work, the allowance becomes a supplement reduced by 30% of the wage); quotation extended to the end of the same sentence, reason aligned. Direction unchanged: €300 or €550 remain below the current RSA (€651.69).Version 4
Family allowancesDirection of change corrected (increase → other): the family income is paid from the first child and without means-testing, but reserved for parents lawfully resident who have been in work for at least five years, a condition the summary left out; more favourable for some, it excludes others. Quotation extended, same page. The announced amount now cites the third-child bonus (around €1.5bn, measure no. 76), excluded from the €40.3bn.Version 3
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the savings the candidate expects from his reform (€40bn cumulative over five years according to LCP, same article; €12bn for the parametric reform in the plan of 12 October 2026 according to Public Sénat) are now cited, and the reason no longer speaks of the “cost” of the age of 63, since the effect of the reform as a whole depends on the pension reduction (décote) and on the full rate at 65. Position still not costed.Version 4
Contribution periodCosting revised: the reason now mentions that the automatic full-rate age would then be linked to life expectancy, a detail given in the same article; position still not costed.Version 3
Funded shareCosting revised: the reason said the contribution rate was not given; the same article cites an option under consideration (contribution of 1% of gross salary shared between employee and employer) and a return set at no less than 4%, with no decision and no funding for the transition. Position still not costed.Version 3
Inheritance and gift taxCosting revised: the reason stated the decrease without an amount or schedule, whereas the same interview and the online programme specify two measures (family gifts exempt for three years up to €150,000 per donor, measures no. 66 and 82; duties on transferred businesses payable only on sale, measure no. 33); it now cites them. Position still not costed: neither has an equivalent in the cost schedule.Version 4
Production taxesCorrected and validated by the editors: the quotation cut, from the list of reductions, the overhaul of the forfait social (€2.8bn), which the candidate counts in his « près de 15 milliards » [“nearly 15 billion”], and the summary attributed these €15bn to the C3S, CVAE and CFE alone (€11.5bn according to him). Sentence restored in full, same page; summary, note and announced amount now specify this, together with the funding announced in the same measure. Costed amount unchanged.Version 3
Teachers' payCosting revised: the funding announced in the same measure (resources freed up by the fall in pupil numbers, more than €3bn a year by the end of the five-year term, with no new tax) is now cited; the cost of the increase is not given, the position remains not costed.Version 3
Funding of private schoolsDirection of change corrected (other → increase): ending the 80-20 rule, which caps the share of teaching resources allocated to private schools under contract, makes it possible to increase public funding of private schools; the candidate says this is « sans dépense nouvelle » [“with no new spending”], through a rebalancing of resources. Same direction as Nicolas Dupont-Aignan's position (class openings requested by private schools).Version 3
Social housingDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): the text abolishes the 20 or 25% quota and its penalties, no longer imposes any target in non-tight areas and maintains targets, in volume, only in tight areas; the obligations are eased, which the summary now says. The same measure also withdraws aid from areas above 30% social housing.Version 3
Personal housing benefits (APL)Costing revised: the reason and the announced amount cited only the APL of non-scholarship students from outside the EU, already abolished since 1 July 2026, and left out the second saving announced in the same sentence (€200m to €300m on the APL of students from the wealthiest families); quotation extended to this sentence, same page, summary, reason and announced amount aligned (the €200m amount, already secured under current law, is no longer used as the position's amount). Position still not costed.Version 3
Home ownershipCosting revised: the funding announced in the same measure (interest covered by the Caisse des dépôts instead of a tax credit borne by the State) is now cited; lever without a coefficient in the cost schedule, position still not costed.Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsPosition updated following a statement of 12 October 2026: the savings plan presented that day raises the non-replacement to 400,000 employees retiring, for €25bn (Public Sénat, LCP), whereas the position cited the 125,000 AI-related departures in the online programme, which are part of them. The partial costing of the 125,000 departures is withdrawn: 400,000 employees falls outside the range of the cost schedule (150,000 at most), so the position is no longer costed.Version 4
New nuclear reactorsDirection of change corrected (other → increase): confirming the order of eight EPR2s beyond the six committed under PPE3, which provides for them only as an option, increases the number of reactors, even subject to progress; same direction as Gabriel Attal's position (« sécuriser les 14 EPR » [“secure the 14 EPRs”]). The condition remains in the summary.Version 3
Wind and solarCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary « Plus d'appels d'offres… » [“No more tenders…”] could be read as « davantage d'appels d'offres » [“more tenders”] and left out two details of the same measure, now cited: the end of tax and tariff advantages for photovoltaic installations commissioned after the law, and the maintenance of existing contracts (« situations juridiques constituées » [“established legal situations”]). Quotation extended, same page; reason aligned, position still not costed.Version 3
Floor prices, farm incomeDirection of change corrected (other → increase): ring-fencing the non-negotiable share of raw materials and strengthening written contracting reinforce the price guarantees of the EGalim laws, which the lever definition counts (price floors, contracts); without a price floor, this is an increase and not a creation, like Jean-François Legendre's position encoded “increase”.Version 3
Free trade agreements (Mercosur)Direction of change corrected (other → decrease): imposing reciprocity clauses in all trade agreements makes access to the European market conditional, a form of protection within the meaning of the lever; same direction as Gabriel Attal's position (mirror clauses in all agreements).Version 3
Industrial aid and reshoringDirection of change corrected (creation → increase): the lever measures public aid to industry, which already exists (France 2030, green industries investment tax credit); a new fund increases it without creating an instrument of a type absent from the law. Common rule: “increase” when the text adds public money for industry (subsidy, targeted tax expenditure, public aid or investment fund); “other” for a rule with no public money announced. Same encoding as the funds of Nicolas Dupont-Aignan and Marine Tondelier. Costing unchanged.Version 4
Industrial aid and reshoringCosting revised: the reason said the State's share was not specified, whereas the same measure gives it (€200m a year, the same for the regions and for European funds) and adds a tax over-depreciation with no amount; the reason and the announced amount now say so. The €400m of French public spending remain not costed: they are below the half-step of the cost schedule parameter (€1bn).Version 3
Citizens' initiative referendum (RIC)Direction of change corrected (other → increase): halving the number of signatures for the shared-initiative referendum and broadening the scope of Article 11 extend citizens' initiative. The summary began with « Pas de RIC » [“No RIC”], which neither the quotation nor the interview says; summary and reason corrected, the reason citing measure no. 12 of the programme (one twentieth of voters).Version 3

Fabien Roussel 19 corrections

Net monthly SMIC (minimum wage)Costing revised: the note now points out that the PCF press release of 18 September 2026 calls for a SMIC of €2,200 gross (about €1,740 net, beyond the range of the cost schedule), and that the costing uses the amount given by the candidate himself (€1,700 net); it also says why the 5% increase in all wages, called for in the same sentence, is not counted. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Legal retirement ageCosting revised: the reason ignored the commitment to repeal « vraiment la réforme des retraites à 64 ans » [“really the pension reform at 64”] (Marseille rally, 23 November 2025, source of other positions), which brings the age back to at least 62, and the « retraite de haut niveau, dès 60 ans à taux plein » [“high-level pension, from age 60 at the full rate”] of the PCF common platform (p. 25), already cited. As for Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Marine Tondelier, who also aim for 60, the age of 62 is now costed as a floor (assumption, partial costing: €11.4bn); the return to 60, below the range of the cost schedule, is not.Version 3
Minimum pensionCorrected and validated by the editors: the next sentence of the same source (« Quand on a travaillé toute sa vie, c'est légitime » [“When you have worked all your life, it is legitimate”]) links the measure to full careers; quote extended, summary completed. The reason for not costing described the measure as « sans condition de carrière » [“with no career condition”]: corrected. Position still not costed.Version 3
VATCosting revised: the reason set the position aside for lack of a list of products and because of a 5% rate; the candidate also calls for VAT to be cut on electricity (statement of 8 April 2026) and « sur l'énergie » [“on energy”] (Marseille rally, 23 November 2025), two sources already cited. The position is now costed using the option « TVA à 5,5 % sur l'énergie » [“VAT at 5.5% on energy”] (€9.5bn), as an assumption, like that of Marine Le Pen, whose rate was not stated. Summary clarified: « TVA ramenée de 20 % à 5 % » [“VAT reduced from 20% to 5%”] could be read as a cut in the standard rate on all products, whereas the remarks concern fuels.Version 2
Level of public spendingCorrected and validated by the editors: the preceding sentence in the same source puts a figure on the pact (« débloquer 100 milliards d’euros par an d’ici 2030 » [“release 100 billion euros a year by 2030”]); quote extended, summary completed. The reason for not costing said “direction without a level”: it now refers this amount, financed by borrowing, to the “Additional public investment, per year” lever. Position still not costed.Version 3
Access to higher educationDirection of change corrected (abolition → other): common rule of the lever, which measures selection at entry to higher education: “abolition” when the text ends selection (guaranteed access without selection, as with Jean-Luc Mélenchon); abolishing or replacing the Parcoursup platform without saying whether selection disappears, tightens or eases is “other”, as with Olivier Becht and Marine Tondelier. The press release replaces Parcoursup with « un véritable service public de l'orientation » [“a genuine public guidance service”] and wants to create places, which loosens selection without ending it or setting its extent.Version 3
Public hospitalsCosting revised: the reason left out the financing set out in the same statement (contributions, challenging exemptions from employer social contributions, an additional levy on companies' financial income); it now cites it, with no amount to count. Position still not costed.Version 3
End of lifeDirection of change corrected (creation → unchanged): assisted dying, which the 2022 position wanted to legalise, has been in force since Law no. 2026-794 of 18 August 2026; same encoding as the positions of Marine Tondelier and François Ruffin, who support the texts passed since. The summary said « une loi pour légaliser » [“a law to legalise”], the quote « un texte de loi qui pourrait le légaliser » [“a bill that could legalise it”]: it now uses his words and recalls the 2026 vote.Version 3
Social housingCosting revised: the note omitted the funding provided for in the same source (« une aide à la pierre ambitieuse et pérenne » [“ambitious and lasting support for housing construction”]) and its amount in the PCF statement of 22 September 2026 (€15bn a year); it now cites them, without taking them into account. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Police and gendarmerie numbersCosting revised: the amount announced in the quote itself (€2.5bn of appropriations « dès maintenant » [“right now”]) is now cited alongside the total, without being counted: the period is not stated and the amount covers staff of other ministries. Position still not costed.Version 3
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: quote extended to the next sentence of the same source, which provides for « compensations » [“compensation”] for hospitals and local authorities. The note now says that the costing uses the candidate's 30% and not the 10% of the PCF press release of 18 September 2026, that the cost of one point is applied thirty times for lack of a bound in the cost schedule (no source read costs an increase of this size), and that it partly overlaps that of the SMIC at €1,700. Amount unchanged (€68.1bn).Version 3
Energy renovations per yearCosting revised: the note specifies that the amount corresponds to the maximum targeted pace (« jusqu'à » [“up to”] 900,000 a year in 2032), at the current average grant for major renovations, and that zero out-of-pocket cost is promised only to the lowest-income households. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Wind and solarCorrected and validated by the editors: the quote had an ordinary space before “%” (“100 %”), the source a non-breaking space; transcription restored exactly. Summary, direction of change and costing unchanged.Version 3
Additional public investment, per yearCosting revised: the announced envelope (€500bn over five years, « fonds d'avenir » [“future fund”] of the congress closing speech) is now cited alongside the total, without being added, like Gabriel Attal's €200bn plan. Position still not costed.Version 3
Nationalisations and privatisationsPosition updated on the basis of a statement of 5 July 2026: the closing speech of the 40th congress sets out, in a single text, the nationalisation of the banks and that of TotalEnergies, which the candidate calls for in four appearances from April to August 2026; the speech at the Fête de l'Humanité (12 September 2026), the source until now, spoke only of « une grande banque » [“a major bank”] and a public banking hub, and of Total only to « confisquer » [“confiscate”] its profits. It is now cited in the reason.Version 3
Nationalisations and privatisationsCosting revised: the reason omitted the nationalisation of TotalEnergies, which the candidate calls for in four appearances from April to August 2026, already sources of other positions; it now cites it. The Fête de l'Humanité position (12 September 2026), more recent, is kept. Position still not costed.Version 2
Everyday transportCosting revised: the reason ignored the statement of 8 April 2026, already the source of other positions, in which the candidate calls for « la mise en place de la gratuité des transports publics urbains » [“the introduction of free urban public transport”], without limiting it to the metropolitan areas; it now cites it and says why the June wording, more recent and narrower, is used. Position still not costed.Version 3
Article 49.3 and revision of the ConstitutionDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): breaking with presidentialism and giving Parliament « des pouvoirs renforcés de contrôle et d’initiative » [“strengthened powers of scrutiny and initiative”] and « la maîtrise de son ordre du jour » [“control of its agenda”] reduces the executive's powers over Parliament, which the lever's rule reads as ↓; same direction as the positions of Marine Tondelier (control of the agenda, end of the limits of Articles 34 and 49.3) and Raphaël Glucksmann.Version 3
Defence budgetCorrected and validated by the editors: the quote had an ordinary space in “16 septembre”, the source a non-breaking space; transcription restored. The reason for not costing, which only said « aucun niveau visé » [“no target level”], now cites the rejection of the €36bn of additional defence appropriations planned by 2030 (speeches at the summer university of 26 August 2026 and in Toulouse on 2 June 2026, already sources of other positions), which does not state the level adopted. Position still not costed.Version 2

François Ruffin 18 corrections

Net monthly SMIC (minimum wage)Costing revised: marked as an assumption; the text says « le SMIC à 1 600€ » [“the SMIC at €1,600”] without specifying net or gross. Reading adopted: €1,600 net, the amount in the Nouveau Front populaire programme, whose « continuité des acquis » [“continuity of gains”] the same paragraph claims; €1,600 gross would be below the current SMIC. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Old age and long-term carePosition updated following a statement of 24 September 2026: the booklet « Face à la crise du logement : faire sauter le verrou », published that day on the campaign website and part of the programme, commits to a plan of 25,000 new places a year in independent-living residences, inclusive housing and shared housing. It replaces the observation, on the candidate's blog (29 April 2026), that « il faut dix milliards d’€ par an » [“ten billion € a year is needed”] for old-age care, which was not a commitment and is still cited in the reason.Version 3
Tax and social security expendituresCosting revised: quote extended to the proposal « Loger les habitants plutôt que les vacanciers » from the same booklet, which wants to tax tourist furnished lets « au moins deux fois plus » [“at least twice as much”] and abolish the allowances and depreciation for furnished lets, including for « à l’année » [“year-round”] furnished lets (micro-BIC and non-professional furnished letting schemes); summary completed, reason extended to this component, not costed for lack of a cost schedule. Position sent back for review.Version 6
Tax and social security expendituresCorrected and validated by the editors: the expected revenue, given in the same proposal (« au moins 3 milliards d’euros par an de recettes publiques supplémentaires » [“at least 3 billion euros a year of additional public revenue”], which the page allocates to public housing), was omitted; quote extended to this sentence and to the preceding one (deduction of inflation and notary fees), announced amount cited without being counted, reason completed. Position still not costed. History consolidated: the reclassification and corrected direction of 12 October fit in one entry, and the review of 13 October (version 4, reviewed and validated by the editors) is included in this one.Version 5
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Costing revised: the reason described the text as « sans seuil » [“without a threshold”], whereas the Zucman tax voted in February 2025, to which the quote refers, sets the threshold at €100m and corresponds to an option in the cost schedule; it now says why the position remains not costed (a past vote, recalled in October 2025 in a question to the Government already cited in this file, absent from the programme booklets). Amount unchanged: not costed.Version 4
Access to higher educationDirection of change corrected (abolition → other): Common rule for the lever, which measures selection for entry to higher education: “abolition” when the text ends selection (guaranteed access without selection, as with Jean-Luc Mélenchon); abolishing or replacing the Parcoursup platform without saying whether selection disappears, is tightened or is eased is “other”, as with Olivier Becht and Marine Tondelier. The candidate calls for the abolition of Parcoursup, which he criticises as an algorithm with no means of appeal, without saying what replaces it or whether access ceases to be selective.Version 2
Social housingCorrected and validated by the editors: the same page quantifies the short-term effort (« +2 à 3 milliards d’euros par an » [“+2 to 3 billion euros a year”], a return to pre-2018 support, to be stepped up) and gives its financing (ending tax advantages for multi-property owners, including the allowance on real estate capital gains), which had been omitted; quote extended to these two sentences, announced amount cited, note added. Costed amount unchanged.Version 3
Energy renovations per yearCosting revised: a single method for all annual targets for major renovations (Marine Tondelier, Fabien Roussel and this position): costed once reached at the current average public grant for a major renovation, as an assumption, with the amount announced by the candidate shown alongside. The position, not costed until now, is costed at 600,000 major renovations a year (about €13.2bn more), marked partial: the contribution from energy companies that would replace the energy savings certificates, a new revenue stream that finances part of the envelope, is not counted, for lack of a lever in the grid. The announced envelope (€15bn a year) is shown as an amount, without a calculated gap: it does not cover the same scope.Version 4
Energy renovations per yearCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary said « sans objectif en nombre » [“without a numerical target”], whereas the same page targets « un million de rénovations par an dont 600 000 d’ampleur » [“one million renovations a year, including 600,000 major ones”]; quote extended to this sentence and to the conversion of energy savings certificates (CEE) into a contribution from energy companies to the Anah budget, which finances the envelope; value (600,000 major renovations) and announced amount (€15bn a year, total envelope) added. Reason for not costing rewritten: the target costed at the average grant would count the spending without the contribution that finances it. Position still not costed.Version 3
New nuclear reactorsDirection of change corrected (other → unchanged): continuing the six EPR2 and making the decision on the next eight subject to EDF's estimate follows the framework of the PPE3 in force (decree of February 2026: six EPR2, eight as an option); the encoded value, 6, equals current law. Unlike Gabriel Attal (« sécuriser les 14 EPR » [“secure the 14 EPRs”]) and Bruno Retailleau (confirm the order for the eight if the six progress), encoded as “increase”, the text makes no commitment on the eight and considers « d’autres solutions si le devis est trop élevé » [“other solutions if the estimate is too high”].Version 3
Wind and solarDirection of change corrected (increase → unchanged): the lever measures faster development than current law; « nous poursuivrons le développement de l’énergie éolienne » [“we will continue the development of wind energy”], with neither pace nor target, does not go beyond the PPE3. Same encoding as the positions of Édouard Philippe and Fabien Roussel. Quote extended, same paragraph, to the sentence on dams, which the summary cited although it did not appear in the quote, and to the one on other renewables; summary reworded.Version 3
Electricity prices, European marketCosting revised: quote extended to the following sentence of the same proposal (gradual return to « un modèle 100% public de production » [“a 100% public production model”], with EDF managing « toutes les nouvelles grandes centrales de production nucléaires et renouvelables » [“all new large nuclear and renewable power plants”]); summary completed; the reason says why this component has no static cost. Position sent back for review.Version 3
Industrial aid and reshoringDirection of change corrected (creation → other): the lever measures public aid to industry, which already exists. Common rule: “increase” when the text adds public money for industry (subsidy, targeted tax expenditure, public aid or investment fund); “other” for a rule with no public money announced or a reshoring target with no instrument. The « 100 produits » plan lists products; the instruments that the same passage associates with it are control of energy prices and making public aid and public procurement conditional on minimum environmental footprints, with no new aid: same encoding as the position of Jean-Luc Mélenchon (reshoring essential production).Version 3
Nationalisations and privatisationsCorrected and validated by the editors: the position omitted the next proposal in the same chapter, defending strategic companies « quitte à nationaliser certaines entreprises stratégiques » [“even if it means nationalising certain strategic companies”]; quote extended, summary completed. Direction “unchanged” replaced by “other”, like the position of Marine Tondelier (public management « en cas de nécessité » [“if necessary”]); status quo costing replaced by “not costed”.Version 3
Everyday transportCosting revised: the reason did not mention the unlimited « billet populaire » [“people's ticket”] at €29 on the TER network in summer (booklet « Pour renouer avec le temps des loisirs », published on 17 July 2026, already the source of other positions); it now cites it. The position from the ecological booklet (9 September 2026), more recent, is kept. Position still not costed, sent back for review.Version 3
Article 49.3 and revision of the ConstitutionDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): allowing parliamentarians to oppose an appointment by a simple majority, instead of the three fifths of votes cast required by Article 13, reduces a power of the executive vis-à-vis Parliament; same encoding as the positions of Marine Tondelier and Raphaël Glucksmann, which reduce these powers.Version 3
Labour immigration and residence permitsCorrected and validated by the editors: the quote omitted what precedes it in the same passage, a « régularisation pour des raisons à la fois humanitaires, mais aussi de production » [“regularisation for reasons that are both humanitarian, but also of production”] of immigrants « déjà ici » [“already here”], « avec ou sans papiers » [“with or without papers”], which the lever's definition counts; quote extended, summary completed. Direction “decrease” replaced by “other”: the text both opens (regularisations, like the positions of Jean-Luc Mélenchon, Fabien Roussel and Marine Tondelier encoded “increase”) and closes (new labour immigration).Version 3
High cost of living overseasDirection of change corrected (creation → increase): public intervention on prices already exists in the overseas territories (quality-price shield, art. L. 410-5 of the Commercial Code; prices can be regulated by decree, art. L. 410-2); capping air fares strengthens it. Same encoding as the positions of Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Raphaël Glucksmann.Version 3

Marine Tondelier 36 corrections

Net monthly SMIC (minimum wage)Corrected and validated by the editors: the summary omitted the counterpart provided for in the same proposal (support for TPE, PME (very small, small and medium-sized businesses) and associations through a cut in the reduced rate of corporate income tax and in the payroll tax); quotation extended to that sentence, same page; costing marked partial, as this support is not costed.Version 3
In-work benefit (prime d'activité)Corrected and validated by the editors: the summary specifies that the measure comes from the crisis exit plan of September 2025; the programme of 25 August 2026 does not include it.Version 3
Governance of unemployment insuranceDirection of change corrected (creation → other): the lever measures the division of rule-making between the State and the social partners; a European unemployment insurance says nothing about this division in France, like Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s position encoded “other”.Version 3
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary omitted the abolition of the 15 hours of weekly activity required of recipients, provided for in the same proposal; quotation extended to that sentence, same page.Version 4
Automatic payment, single social allowanceCosting revised: the reading of take-up raised to 100% for the RSA and the in-work benefit, the upper bound of the effect of automation, is now flagged as an assumption; amount unchanged.Version 3
Legal retirement ageCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary reserved the target of 60 for long careers, whereas the text aims at retirement at 60, giving priority to people who started work early and in arduous conditions; the costing note now mentions the funding through contributions provided for in the same chapter (p. 117), which is not counted.Version 3
Long careersCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary made two groups (« ceux qui ont commencé tôt et les métiers pénibles » [“those who started early and arduous occupations”]) out of a priority that the text gives to « personnes ayant travaillé tôt et dans des conditions pénibles » [“people who worked early and in arduous conditions”], within the framework of retirement at 60 targeted for all; reason for not costing aligned.Version 4
Arduous workCosting revised: marked partial; only the reinstatement of the 4 factors removed in 2017 is costed, not the new psychosocial risks criterion nor the recognition of arduous occupations by sector provided for in the same proposal (p. 117). Amount unchanged.Version 3
Pension indexationCosting revised: the reason now cites the detail given on p. 67 of the programme (« Sous-indexer les plus hautes retraites » [“Under-index the highest pensions”]), without a threshold; position still not costed.Version 3
Funded shareCorrected and validated by the editors: the position omitted proposal 31-6 on the same page, which replaces the « compte épargne retraite » [“retirement savings accounts”] and life insurance with a fund managed by the Caisse des dépôts; quotation extended to that sentence, direction “unchanged” replaced by “other” (retirement savings would move from private products to a public fund, without its share being set), status quo replaced by “not costed”.Version 3
CSG (general social contribution)Costing revised: the note now flags the 3-point increase in the CSG on capital income proposed on p. 68, omitted until now; it is recorded under the “flat tax” lever, in the same proposal as the increase in the flat tax (PFU). Amount of this position unchanged.Version 3
Flat-rate levy on capital (flat tax)Corrected and validated by the editors: the 3-point increase in the CSG on capital income, in the preceding sentence of the same proposal, was omitted; quotation extended to that sentence, summary completed. Reading adopted: a single 3-point increase, the CSG raising the flat tax (PFU) by the same amount. The 3 points remain costed on the flat tax base (€1.2bn); the increase on other capital income is not costed.Version 3
Tax and social security expendituresCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary left out the tax exemption of maintenance payments for those who receive them, a new tax advantage cited in the same proposal; the direction “decrease” remains, as most of the text restricts tax expenditures.Version 3
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Direction of change corrected (creation → increase): a wealth tax already exists, the IFI, which replaced the ISF in 2018; restoring the ISF increases the taxation of wealth, like the positions of Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Fabien Roussel, encoded “increase”; the Zucman tax, a new tax, points in the same direction. Costing revised: the note said the ISF parameters were not given; the Écologistes’ Budget 2027 dossier (26 August 2026) gives its entry threshold, €1.3m, that of the 2017 ISF, and a schedule modulated according to the carbon footprint of investments, without rates. The “restore the ISF” option (2017 base, net gain over the IFI), counted for Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Fabien Roussel, is now added to the 2% minimum tax, as an assumption and in part.Version 4
Inheritance and gift taxCorrected and validated by the editors: more precise primary source added, the Écologistes’ Budget 2027 dossier (26 August 2026, p. 6), which gives the rates (10% above €4m inherited, a further 10% above €13m) and an announced yield of €15bn per year at cruising speed; the reason “without rates” is removed. The summary said « fin » [“end”] of the Dutreil pact, which the text caps. The programme (p. 66) also provides for the end of the allowance specific to life insurance, mentioned in the reason.Version 3
VATCosting revised: the reason said the rates were not given; the Budget 2027 dossier (26 August 2026) specifies them (20% and 5.5%). As the lists of products remain open, the position remains not costed.Version 3
Corporate income taxDirection of change corrected (increase → other): the rate modulated according to the allocation of profits may fall for reinvested profits, and the programme elsewhere (p. 55) cuts the reduced rate for SMEs; like the positions of Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Raphaël Glucksmann on a modulated or progressive tax, encoded “other”.Version 3
Production taxesCosting revised: « rétablir la CVAE » [“restore the CVAE”] is costed as its maintenance beyond 2030 at the current level (€3.7bn); this reading is now flagged as an assumption, and the return to the pre-2023 level, not costed, as a missing part. Amount unchanged.Version 3
Public deficit targeted for 2032Corrected and validated by the editors: the summary « sans cible chiffrée » [“no quantified target”] could be read as a refusal to reduce the deficit, whereas the text renegotiates a path of decreasing deficits. The programme gives no target for 2032; the quantified path of the September 2025 plan (3.7% of GDP in 2030) is not used, as it is not confirmed by the August 2026 programme.Version 3
Fiscal rulesCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary (« revoir Maastricht » [“revisit Maastricht”]) softened a text that abolishes the constraints of the Stability Pact, the safeguard clauses and the indicators of the Maastricht Treaty; direction “other” replaced by “decrease”, as all the measures cited make the rules less binding.Version 3
Medical deductiblesCosting revised: the option adopted also abolishes the flat-rate contributions (participations forfaitaires), which the text does not name; this reading is now flagged as an assumption, amount unchanged.Version 3
Extra-billing by doctorsCosting revised: marked partial; the counterpart provided for in the same proposal, an increase in the social security tariff for undervalued specialities, has a public cost that is not costed (no amount). The regulation itself remains at zero cost.Version 3
Juvenile justiceDirection of change corrected (unchanged → decrease): the summary itself noted a change (« moins de comparutions rapides » [“fewer fast-track appearances”]); limiting fast-track trials of minors makes the criminal justice response less summary, the maintenance of the 13-year threshold changing nothing. The status quo costing is replaced by “not costed”.Version 3
Public broadcastingDirection of change corrected (unchanged → other): the text changes the funding method (« pérenne » [“lasting”], with no amount) and the appointment of executives (qualified majority of Parliament); this is not a continuation, without being a costed increase in funding.Version 3
Carbon priceDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): refusing the extension of the carbon market to households provided for by the ETS2 directive, current European law, reduces the scope of the carbon price.Version 3
Energy renovations per yearCosting revised: the amount announced by Les Écologistes for 2027 (+€1.4bn for MaPrimeRénov', Budget 2027 dossier) is now cited, and the note specifies that the €10.6bn is the cost of the target of 500,000 renovations per year in a full year, at the current average aid, and not their budget. Costing maintained: same method as for the other large-scale renovation targets, assumption flagged.Version 3
Existing nuclear fleetCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary omitted the studies on extending certain power stations, under strict safety conditions, provided for in the same proposal to avoid a break in supply.Version 3
Electricity prices, European marketDirection of change corrected (other → decrease): besides decoupling from the price of fossil fuels, the text lowers taxation on electricity (excise duty, VAT on the standing charge), and thus the price paid, like Fabien Roussel’s position encoded “decrease”.Version 3
Additional public investment, per yearCosting revised: the note specifies that the renovation lever costs the target of 500,000 renovations per year in a full year (€10.6bn), and not the +€1.4bn for MaPrimeRénov' announced for 2027; adding the two items therefore does not give the cost of the announced envelope. Amount unchanged.Version 4
Industrial aid and reshoringDirection of change corrected (creation → increase): the lever measures public aid to industry, which already exists (France 2030, green industries investment tax credit, Bpifrance interventions); a new sovereign fund increases it without creating an instrument of a type absent from the law. Common rule: “increase” when the text adds public money to industry (subsidy, targeted tax expenditure, public aid or investment fund); “other” for a rule with no public money announced. Same encoding as the funds of Nicolas Dupont-Aignan and Bruno Retailleau. Costing unchanged.Version 3
Article 49.3 and revision of the ConstitutionCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary « plus limité par le 49.3 » [“no longer limited by 49.3”] could be read the wrong way round (“more limited”), and « maître de son ordre du jour » [“master of its agenda”] hardened « un meilleur contrôle de son ordre du jour » [“better control over its agenda”]; direction “other” replaced by “decrease”, as the text reduces the executive’s powers over Parliament.Version 3
Right of asylumDirection of change corrected (other → increase): the restored collegiality at the CNDA and the right to work from the time of application both widen the guarantees for asylum seekers, like Raphaël Glucksmann’s position on the right to work, encoded “increase”.Version 3
Place in the European UnionCosting revised: the reason said the position had no defined budgetary effect, whereas the same page targets a European budget of 2% of European GDP in 2035 and 5% in 2050; it now mentions this. Position still not costed: the effect on the French contribution depends on the split, not specified, between own resources and national contributions.Version 3
Defence budgetCorrected and validated by the editors: source replaced by a more recent primary source, the Écologistes’ Budget 2027 dossier (26 August 2026, p. 4), in place of remarks reported by Public Sénat in March 2025, in which the mention of the Zucman tax came from the journalist’s paraphrase. The dossier takes up the €6.4bn increase provided for by the updated military programming act (law of 16 August 2026), without aiming higher: direction “increase” replaced by “unchanged”, costing as status quo (assumption flagged).Version 3
Support for UkraineDirection of change corrected (increase → unchanged): the direction contradicted the costing, which reads this support, with no amount or announced increase, as the continuation of current aid; France already supplies long-range missiles and air defence systems, and the quotation asks neither for more aid nor for an amount.Version 3
High cost of living overseasDirection of change corrected (other → increase): application of anti-trust rules and strengthened margin controls, i.e. stronger public intervention on prices in territories where it already exists (quality-price shield under the law of 20 November 2012, art. L. 410-5 of the Commercial Code; prices that can be regulated by decree, art. L. 410-2); same encoding as the price controls of Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Raphaël Glucksmann. The reform of the shield and of the octroi de mer (dock dues), not specified, does not change this direction.Version 3

Éric Zemmour 17 corrections

RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCosting revised: the amount in Sarah Knafo's plan (€4.8bn), cited only in the reason, is now displayed as the announced amount, with the condition set by the plan and not given in the quotation (the limit only targets recipients « en capacité de travailler » [“able to work”]). Position still not costed.Version 3
Family allowancesCosting revised: the amount the plan gives for the same line (€15bn to €20bn, all targeted benefits), cited only in the reason, is now displayed as the announced amount, without being compared with this single position. Position still not costed.Version 3
Contribution periodCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary (« portée de 43 à 44, 45 ou 46 ans » [“raised from 43 to 44, 45 or 46 years”]) hardened « on peut augmenter à 44, 45, 46 ans » [“we can increase to 44, 45, 46 years”] and the quotation stopped at « on ne tiendra pas comme ça » [“we will not hold out like that”], without what follows, which gives the candidate's answer: to inject « une partie de capitalisation » [“a share of funding”]. Quotation extended by one sentence before and two after, same source; direction unchanged.Version 3
Funded shareDirection of change corrected (increase → creation): as the mandatory scheme has no funded pillar, gradually introducing funding creates one; same encoding as the positions of Bruno Retailleau, Gabriel Attal, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan and Édouard Philippe.Version 2
CSG (general social contribution)Corrected and validated by the editors: the quotation stopped before the sentence in which Sarah Knafo states that she gives its financing (« Et je dis précisément comment elle est financée » [“And I say precisely how it is financed”]); quotation extended up to that sentence, same answer, and reason for not costing completed. Summary, direction and costing unchanged.Version 3
Tax and social security fraudCosting revised: the amount the plan gives for the same line (€2bn to €3bn), cited only in the reason, is now displayed as the announced amount. Position still not costed.Version 3
Inheritance and gift taxCosting revised: the same op-ed presents this abolition, together with that of the CVAE, as made possible by its €80bn of savings (« Forts de ces économies » [“On the strength of these savings”]) and puts the total of its cuts in levies at €20bn, with no amount for this measure; a note now says so. Amount unchanged (€17bn, inheritance tax yield forecast for 2026).Version 4
Corporate income taxCosting revised: the reason cited only the 2025 yield (€7.5bn), which could be read as the cost of the measure; yet the cost schedule (“Windfall profits and share buybacks” lever) notes that the surcharge, renewed for 2026, is not in the law beyond that: abolishing it costs nothing in 2032 compared with current policies. The reason now says so. Position still not costed.Version 3
Announced savingsCosting revised: the measures of Sarah Knafo's plan that have no lever in the grid (development aid, urban policy, agencies…) are now cited in a note to the announced amount; those that do are recorded on their lever (AME, tuition fees, emergency shelter, EU budget, APL). Position still not costed.Version 3
Announced savingsCosting revised: the announced amount was given as “horizon not specified”, whereas Sarah Knafo's plan, to which it refers (« Nous, avec Sarah Knafo » [“We, with Sarah Knafo”]) and which this file already cites, announces €140bn of savings « par an, au minimum » [“per year, at a minimum”], detailed in 24 measures (budget2027.fr). Position still not costed: a target is compared with the sum of the measures, it is not added to it.Version 2
Numbers and pay of civil servantsCosting revised: Sarah Knafo's plan, to which the quotation refers (« Nous, avec Sarah Knafo » [“We, with Sarah Knafo”]) and which this file already cites, specifies the means (non-replacement of 800,000 administrative departures over the five-year term, out of 2.3 million departures) and the amount (€40bn); they are now cited as the announced amount and in the reason. Position still not costed.Version 3
Public broadcastingCosting revised: only the privatisation of France Télévisions and Radio France was costed (€3.09bn, partial), whereas the plan privatises all of public broadcasting; the cost schedule option that removes all public funding (€3.88bn) matches this scope, assumption flagged. The amount announced by the plan (€4bn, plus the proceeds of the sales) is now displayed.Version 3
Energy renovations per yearCosting revised: the amount the plan gives for the same line (€6bn), cited only in the summary, is now displayed as the announced amount, with no gap calculated: it covers the whole of the Anah, the costing only major renovations. Costed amount unchanged.Version 3
New nuclear reactorsDirection of change corrected (other → increase): fourteen EPRs by 2045, instead of the six committed under the PPE3 (multi-year energy programme) (the other eight are only an option there), increase the number of reactors; same encoding as the positions of Gabriel Attal (« sécuriser les 14 EPR » [“secure the 14 EPRs”]) and Bruno Retailleau (eight more EPR2s).Version 4
Wind and solarCosting revised: the announced amount, €8bn of savings, cited in the quotation itself and taken up in Sarah Knafo's plan (budget2027.fr, measure 6), is now displayed next to the position, like that of Nicolas Dupont-Aignan on the same lever. Position still not costed.Version 3
Article 49.3 and revision of the ConstitutionCorrected and validated by the editors: the quotation skipped two sentences of the answer (« Autrement dit, une loi postérieure primerait sur un traité antérieur. C'était la tradition juridique française […] jusqu'en 1989. » [“In other words, a later law would prevail over an earlier treaty. That was the French legal tradition […] until 1989.”]) without flagging it and stopped at a comma; it is restored in full up to the end of the sentence on the QPC, same source. Summary and direction unchanged.Version 3
Labour immigration and residence permitsCorrected and validated by the editors: the summary said « plus d'un an » [“more than a year”] when the quotation sets the threshold at « un an dirons-nous » [“a year, let us say”] (« plus de six mois à un an » [“more than six months to a year”]), and left out that the expulsion also targets legally resident foreigners, which the quotation specifies. Direction unchanged.Version 2

13 October 2026

4 corrections · Gabriel Attal (1), Jean-Luc Mélenchon (1), Marine Tondelier (1), Éric Zemmour (1)

Gabriel Attal 1 correction

School timetablesPosition updated following a statement of 10 October 2026: the « révolution du temps scolaire » [“revolution in school time”] of the youth pact replaces the experiment with lessons starting at 9 am, recorded on 6 October.Version 3

Jean-Luc Mélenchon 1 correction

End of lifeDirection of change corrected (creation → other change): assisted dying has existed since Law No. 2026-794 of 18 August 2026; the position enshrines it in the Constitution without broadening access to it.Version 2

Marine Tondelier 1 correction

End of lifeDirection of change corrected (creation → unchanged): the two laws that the programme calls for adopting are in force (Law no. 2026-404 of 26 May 2026 on palliative care, Law no. 2026-794 of 18 August 2026 on assistance in dying).Version 2

Éric Zemmour 1 correction

New nuclear reactorsCosting revised after the cross-check of the cost schedule: reactors beyond the PPE3 taken out of the cost schedule's scope; position not costed. (v2, 2026-10-12) Then: Reviewed and validated by the editors (v3, 2026-10-13)Version 3

12 October 2026

57 corrections · Gabriel Attal (11), Nicolas Dupont-Aignan (7), Raphaël Glucksmann (1), Marine Le Pen (2), David Lisnard (3), Jean-Luc Mélenchon (3), Édouard Philippe (3), Bruno Retailleau (12), François Ruffin (4), Marine Tondelier (9), Éric Zemmour (2)

Gabriel Attal 11 corrections

Reductions in social contributions on low wagesDirection of change corrected (decrease → increase): reduction in contributions, lever direction ruleVersion 2
OvertimeDirection of change corrected (abolition → increase): ceiling lifted, lever direction ruleVersion 3
OvertimePosition reclassified from the « duree-travail » lever to « heures-supplementaires » (grid overhaul)Version 2
Inheritance and gift taxPosition reclassified from the « patrimoine » lever to « droits-succession » (grid overhaul)Version 2
Production taxesDirection of change corrected (abolition → unchanged): the abolition of the CVAE is already scheduled by lawVersion 2
Announced savingsDirection of change corrected (decrease → increase): lever direction ruleVersion 2
Juvenile justiceDirection of change corrected (other change → increase): lever direction ruleVersion 2
Energy renovations per yearDirection of change corrected (other change → increase): « massive » [“massive”] renovation, with no numberVersion 2
New nuclear reactorsCosting revised after the cross-check of the cost schedule: reactors beyond the PPE3 taken out of the scope of the cost schedule; position not costed.Version 3
New nuclear reactorsDirection of change corrected (other change → increase): 14 EPRs instead of the 6 committedVersion 2
Free trade agreements (Mercosur)Direction of change corrected (other change → decrease): lever direction ruleVersion 2

Nicolas Dupont-Aignan 7 corrections

Pension indexationDirection of change corrected (other change → unchanged): basic pensions are already indexed to inflationVersion 2
Inheritance and gift taxPosition reclassified from the « patrimoine » lever to « droits-succession » (grid overhaul)Version 2
Ability groups, organisation of lower secondary schoolDirection of change corrected (other change → increase): lever direction ruleVersion 2
Juvenile justiceDirection of change corrected (other change → increase): lever direction ruleVersion 2
Public broadcastingDirection of change corrected (other change → decrease): end of public funding, lever's direction ruleVersion 2
Free trade agreements (Mercosur)Direction of change corrected (abolition → decrease): rejection of existing or pending agreements, lever's direction ruleVersion 2
Defence budgetDirection of change corrected (increase → unchanged): 2.5% of GDP is the floor of the military programming lawVersion 2

Raphaël Glucksmann 1 correction

Inheritance and gift taxPosition reclassified from the « patrimoine » lever to « droits-succession » (grid overhaul)Version 2

Marine Le Pen 2 corrections

VATCosting revised after the cross-check of the cost schedule: option based on an unreviewed source removed from the cost schedule; position not costed.Version 2
Fiscal rulesPosition reclassified from the « constitution-49-3 » lever to « regles-budgetaires » (grid overhaul)Version 2

David Lisnard 3 corrections

Production taxesDirection of change corrected (abolition → decrease): abolition of some production taxes, not of the whole category, per the lever's direction ruleVersion 2
Juvenile justiceDirection of change corrected (decrease → increase): lever direction ruleVersion 2
Birthright citizenship and nationalityDirection of change corrected (decrease → abolition): end of acquisition of nationality through birthright (droit du sol)Version 2

Jean-Luc Mélenchon 3 corrections

Statutory working timeDirection of change corrected (other change → decrease): 32 h in arduous jobs, below the legal working timeVersion 2
Legal retirement ageCosting revised after the cross-check of the cost schedule: the sum of two incompatible costings (CNAV 2032 and Institut Montaigne 2027) is removed; position not costed.Version 2
Prisons and sentencesDirection of change corrected (other change → decrease): prison population regulation, lever direction ruleVersion 2

Édouard Philippe 3 corrections

Inheritance and gift taxPosition reclassified from the « patrimoine » lever to « droits-succession » (grid overhaul)Version 2
Production taxesPosition reclassified from the « relocalisations » lever to « impots-production » (grid overhaul)Version 2
Public deficit targeted for 2032Position reclassified from the « constitution-49-3 » lever to « deficit-2032 » (grid overhaul)Version 2

Bruno Retailleau 12 corrections

Reductions in social contributions on low wagesDirection of change corrected (decrease → increase): reduction in contributions, lever direction ruleVersion 2
Profit sharing (participation, intéressement)Direction of change corrected (decrease → increase): scheme made more advantageous, lever direction ruleVersion 2
Unemployment, work period required to qualify for benefitsDirection of change corrected (decrease → increase): the required work period becomes longerVersion 2
OvertimeDirection of change corrected (decrease → increase): exemption extended, lever direction ruleVersion 2
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsDirection of change corrected (other change → decrease): basic amount lower than the current RSAVersion 2
Legal retirement ageDirection of change corrected (other change → decrease): 63, below the legal retirement age under current lawVersion 2
Family quotientPosition reclassified from the « impot-revenu » lever to « quotient-familial » (grid overhaul)Version 2
Tax and social security expendituresDirection of change corrected (abolition → decrease): abolition of one tax expenditure, not of the tax expenditure system, lever direction ruleVersion 2
Inheritance and gift taxPosition reclassified from the « patrimoine » lever to « droits-succession » (grid overhaul)Version 2
Ability groups, organisation of lower secondary schoolDirection of change corrected (creation → increase): lever direction ruleVersion 2
Access to higher educationDirection of change corrected (other change → increase): stronger selection, lever direction ruleVersion 2
PesticidesDirection of change corrected (other change → increase): lever direction ruleVersion 2

François Ruffin 4 corrections

Sunday and night workDirection of change corrected (increase → other change): higher pay for atypical hours, with no change to the authorisationVersion 2
Tax and social security expendituresPosition reclassified from the “wealth” lever to “tax expenditures” (grid overhaul); direction of change corrected (abolition → decrease): abolition of one tax expenditure, not of the tax expenditure system, lever's direction ruleVersion 3
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Costing revised after the cross-check of the cost schedule: the former central value (€12.5bn, mid-range with no source) is withdrawn; position not costed.Version 2
Announced savingsDirection of change corrected (decrease → increase): lever direction ruleVersion 2

Marine Tondelier 9 corrections

Profit sharing (participation, intéressement)Direction of change corrected (increase → decrease): schemes made less advantageous (contributions), lever direction ruleVersion 2
OvertimeDirection of change corrected (abolition → decrease): exemption withdrawn on a scheme that is maintained, lever direction ruleVersion 2
RSA (minimum income), amount and conditionsCosting revised after the cross-check of the cost schedule: refuted coefficient removed from the cost schedule; position not costed.Version 2
Long careersDirection of change corrected (decrease → increase): early departures widened, lever direction ruleVersion 2
Wealth tax (IFI, ISF)Costing revised after the cross-check of the cost schedule: the former central value (€12.5bn, mid-range with no source) is withdrawn; position not costed.Version 2
Announced savingsDirection of change corrected (decrease → increase): lever direction ruleVersion 2
Prisons and sentencesDirection of change corrected (other change → decrease): numerus clausus and moratorium on places, lever direction ruleVersion 2
Free trade agreements (Mercosur)Direction of change corrected (other change → decrease): lever direction ruleVersion 2
Additional public investment, per yearCosting revised after the cross-check of the cost schedule: MaPrimeRénov' (€1.4bn) removed from the envelope so as not to count it twice.Version 2

Éric Zemmour 2 corrections

Legal retirement ageCosting revised after the cross-check of the cost schedule: reference law set at 63 years and 9 months (retirements in 2032).Version 2
Inheritance and gift taxPosition reclassified from the « patrimoine » lever to « droits-succession » (grid overhaul)Version 2

Changes to the cost schedule are not yet included in this list: they apply to all candidates at once and will be available in the code history, published when the site opens.

Corrections to the explainers

Justice and police: resources, results and the candidates' proposalsRaphaël Glucksmann's row: the Socialist Party's platform, which he has not taken up, is replaced by the text of Place publique, the movement he co-chairs (« Acte un », 2025); juvenile justice: “None found”. References to the Socialist Party's platform are removed from the text.21 October 2026

Challenges received

No challenge received to date. To send one: Contest an encoding.

Published corrections

824 corrections

21 October 2026

Raphaël Glucksmann 14 corrections

20 October 2026

Jean-Luc Mélenchon 1 correction

19 October 2026

Gabriel Attal 1 correction

Nicolas Dupont-Aignan 1 correction

Raphaël Glucksmann 1 correction

David Lisnard 1 correction

Bruno Retailleau 1 correction

18 October 2026

Gabriel Attal 24 corrections

Nicolas Dupont-Aignan 28 corrections

Raphaël Glucksmann 37 corrections

Marine Le Pen 60 corrections

David Lisnard 22 corrections

Jean-Luc Mélenchon 55 corrections

Édouard Philippe 31 corrections

Bruno Retailleau 48 corrections

Fabien Roussel 37 corrections

François Ruffin 22 corrections

Marine Tondelier 38 corrections

Éric Zemmour 54 corrections

15 October 2026

Raphaël Glucksmann 1 correction

14 October 2026

Gabriel Attal 20 corrections

Nicolas Dupont-Aignan 22 corrections

Raphaël Glucksmann 20 corrections

Marine Le Pen 16 corrections

David Lisnard 29 corrections

Jean-Luc Mélenchon 41 corrections

Édouard Philippe 21 corrections

Bruno Retailleau 27 corrections

Fabien Roussel 19 corrections

François Ruffin 18 corrections

Marine Tondelier 36 corrections

Éric Zemmour 17 corrections

13 October 2026

Gabriel Attal 1 correction

Jean-Luc Mélenchon 1 correction

Marine Tondelier 1 correction

Éric Zemmour 1 correction

12 October 2026

Gabriel Attal 11 corrections

Nicolas Dupont-Aignan 7 corrections

Raphaël Glucksmann 1 correction

Marine Le Pen 2 corrections

David Lisnard 3 corrections

Jean-Luc Mélenchon 3 corrections

Édouard Philippe 3 corrections

Bruno Retailleau 12 corrections

François Ruffin 4 corrections

Marine Tondelier 9 corrections

Éric Zemmour 2 corrections

Corrections to the explainers

Challenges received