Housing, Fabien Roussel
Social housing: SRU quota raised to 30% in urban areas, 200,000 social homes a year
Direction of change: increase, compared with current law.
The lever. Construction of social housing: annual target, or obligations imposed on municipalities (loi SRU). Direction rule: ↑ more social housing, tougher obligations.
« Le PCF et Fabien Roussel proposent d’aller plus loin, et de la renforcer. En 2000, à l’origine le taux de logements sociaux imposé par la loi SRU était de 20%. Ce taux a été porté à 25% en 2013. 13 ans après, il est temps de le porter à 30% en zone urbaine. […] 200 000 nouveaux logements sociaux par an pendant 5 ans, c’est ce qu’il fait faire, et une loi SRU « à 30% » nous y aidera grandement. »1Translation by the editorsThe PCF and Fabien Roussel propose to go further, and to strengthen it. In 2000, originally, the rate of social housing imposed by the SRU law was 20%. This rate was raised to 25% in 2013. 13 years later, it is time to raise it to 30% in urban areas. […] 200,000 new social homes a year for 5 years is what needs to be done, and an SRU law “at 30%” will help us greatly.
PCF, « Vite une loi SRU 2, avec un taux de logements sociaux porté à 30% ! », 26 September 2026. Position taken from a document of the candidate’s party or movement, not from a presidential programme.
No programme released. Positions taken from public statements, words of associates or documents of the candidate’s party, each dated and sourced; last recorded on 18 October 2026.
Encoding
| Parameter | Current law | Proposed | Effective date or horizon |
|---|---|---|---|
| Social housing units financed per year | 99,000 homes per year | 200,000 homes per year (assumption by the editors, see the costing) | full year 2032, €bn/year |
Costing
Announced by the candidate
not announced
The cited source does not cost this measure.
Published costings
none
No external costing of this position recorded to date.
Our calculation
−€1.6bn
per year for the public accounts, new spending, range −€1.7bn to −€1.4bn.
The calculation
- Social housing units financed per year: (200,000 − 99,000) ÷ 10,000 = 10.1 times “10,000 more social housing units a year”, each a cost of €0.16bn (0.14 to 0.17).
Assumption by the editors. Partial costing. Only the 200,000 social housing units a year are costed; the SRU quota raised to 30% is a planning rule, with no direct costed effect. The same source calls for « rétablie une aide à la pierre ambitieuse et pérenne » [“an ambitious and lasting construction subsidy to be restored”]; the PCF puts it at « 15 milliards d’euros annuels » [“15 billion euros a year”] (statement of 22 September 2026, source of the position on rents), an amount cited without being included: it does not cover the same scope as the unit cost in the cost schedule.
Coefficient calculated by the editors from AN, rapport spécial PLF 2026, Logement et hébergement d'urgence (F. Jolivet): the position is marked as an assumption by the editors.
Current law, sources and limits of the cost schedule
Current law. SRU act: 20 to 25% social housing. Solidarity rent reduction (RLS) levied on social landlords since 2018: €1.1bn in 2025, €1.3bn in the PLF 2026, with a compromise target in the Senate of €0.9bn. 99,000 social housing units approved in 2024, about 33,000 of them PLAI (very-low-income housing).
Horizon. full year 2032, €bn/year
Limits. Coefficient: the Institut Montaigne costs 135,000 additional social housing units per year at €1.9bn to €2.3bn (2.1 central) for general government, i.e. €0.14bn to €0.17bn per 10,000 dwellings (public subsidies of 8 to 9% of a construction cost of €156,000 to €172,000, increased for the RE2020 standard; editors' calculation). “Net” convention: these subsidies include those of Action logement, which is not a public administration; the source does not give its share and the page could not be re-checked in October 2026 (access refused): the coefficient is not net of it and therefore overstates the cost for general government. The reference pace is that of 2024 approvals (99,000); Montaigne started from 65,000 dwellings built. Not counted: the property tax exemption for 25 to 30 years, VAT at 5.5%, the interest rate advantage of loans from the fonds d'épargne (savings fund), land, the equity the State might have to provide (of the order of €2bn according to Montaigne) and the effect on VAT (from −€350m to +€350m depending on whether the dwellings replace or add to other construction). The 5 to 10% increase for the RE2020 standard, specific to the text costed in 2022 (Mélenchon), is applied as is to the other positions. FNAP bricks-and-mortar aid alone (about €5.5k per dwelling) would greatly underestimate the public cost. The RLS (rent reduction scheme) amounts differ according to the stage of the 2026 budget procedure (€1.3bn / €1.1bn / €0.9bn).
- AN, rapport spécial PLF 2026, Logement et hébergement d'urgence (F. Jolivet), 2025-10: « la hausse de la RLS à 1,3 milliard d'euros pour 2026 (contre 1,1 milliard ... ; L'augmentation de l'objectif de production à 120 000 logements (dont 40 000 PLAI) nécessiterait 110 millions d'euros supplémentaires ; 99 000 agréments ont été délivrés en 2024 »
- Sénat, avis PLF 2026 Logement, 2025-11: « 200 millions par rapport à 2025, pour l'élever à 1,3 milliard après 1,1 milliard l'an dernier »
- Institut Montaigne, Présidentielle 2022, chiffrage de « Construire 200 000 logements publics par an pendant cinq ans » (copie d'archive du 19 décembre 2024, le site renvoyant une erreur 403), 2022: « Cependant en tenant compte du rythme de construction annuel des bailleurs sociaux (65 000 logements en moyenne chaque année), ce sont 135 000 unités supplémentaires qu’il faudrait réaliser. En net, le besoin de financement serait ainsi compris entre 22,1 et 25,5 Md€ annuels. En pratique, les subventions publiques représentent de l’ordre de 8 à 9 % du coût total des logements […] Au total, le coût pour les administrations publiques pourrait représenter de 1,9 Md€ à 2,3 Md€ par an. »
How to read these amounts. These are static costs and revenues, with no feedback effect, over a full year: nothing on growth, employment or the revenue that economic activity would gain or lose. A higher net cost does not on its own make a worse policy, nor net savings a better one: each programme rests on an economic model (demand-led stimulus, lower compulsory levies, consolidation of the public accounts…) that the cost schedule does not settle. GDP itself measures a volume of activity, not well-being or the usefulness of what is produced. Economic models and feedback effects.
- PCF, « Vite une loi SRU 2, avec un taux de logements sociaux porté à 30% ! », 26 September 2026. Position taken from a document of the candidate’s party or movement, not from a presidential programme. Read the source (PCF, « Vite une loi SRU 2, avec un taux de logements sociaux porté à 30% ! »).
Contest this encoding (prefilled email; procedure and deadlines)