Déchiffrer 2027

FREN

Wealth and inheritance, François Ruffin

Wealth tax (IFI, ISF): Voted for the Zucman tax, « 2 % d'impôt sur les patrimoines » [“2% tax on wealth”]

Direction of change: creation of a scheme, compared with current law.

The lever. Taxation of wealth: real estate wealth tax (IFI), return of a tax on all assets, or a tax on very large fortunes. Direction rule: ↑ heavier taxation of wealth.

« Avec mes collègues Eva Sas et Clémentine Autain comme cheffes de file, nous avons voté, avec une majorité de députés, la taxe Zucman. 2% d’impôt sur les patrimoines, deux petits pourcents. »1

Translation by the editorsWith my colleagues Eva Sas and Clémentine Autain as leaders, we voted, with a majority of MPs, for the Zucman tax. 2% tax on wealth, two small per cent.

Words of François Ruffin, « C'est le début d'un long chemin avec vous » (discours, blog), 13 April 2025. Position taken from public statements, not from a written programme.

Encoding

Position linked to an option of the cost schedule, with no parameter to set: see the costing.

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

+€20bn

per year for the public accounts, new revenue, range +€15bn to +€25bn.

The calculation

  • Minimum tax of 2% on fortunes above €100m (« taxe Zucman », private member's bill passed by the National Assembly in February 2025), static: high estimate, that of its proponents (Gabriel Zucman, National Assembly report no. 930 and Senate report no. 689); the administration has not simulated it; estimates that take account of exile, tax optimisation or the deduction of corporate income tax are much lower (€2bn to €5bn): Option costed by the source: a gain of €20bn (15 to 25) per year.

Assumption by the editors. Reading adopted: the vote, recalled in a rally speech, for the Zucman tax (bill adopted by the Assembly in February 2025: 2% minimum tax on wealth above €100m), whose rejection he was still blaming on the government in October 2025 (question to the Government No. 894), counts as a proposal of this scheme; the €100m threshold, which the quote does not repeat, is that of the text voted. The Zucman tax (2% minimum tax on wealth above €100m) is costed at the high end of the estimates, €15bn to €25bn (about 20), that of its promoters (Gabriel Zucman, Assembly report No. 930 and Senate report No. 689); the administration has not simulated it; estimates taking account of exile, tax optimisation or the deduction of corporate income tax are much lower (€2bn to €5bn).

Current law, sources and limits of the cost schedule

Current law. IFI (real estate wealth tax, since 2018): net real estate assets above €1.3m; scale from 0.5% to 1.5% above €0.8m; capped at 75% of income. 194,000 tax assessments in 2025, for €2.3bn in budget accounting (€2.7bn in national accounts); €3.1bn forecast for 2026. The ISF raised €5.1bn in 2017 (358,000 households). The PLF 2026 creates a tax on the financial assets of holding companies (+€1.0bn forecast). No minimum tax on very large fortunes (« taxe Zucman »): the private member's bill adopted by the National Assembly in February 2025 was rejected by the Senate in June 2025.

Horizon. Full year; ISF counterfactual in 2022 euros, not updated for 2032; minimum tax estimated on 2024 fortunes (Challenges ranking), not updated.

Limits. Restoring the wealth tax (ISF): central value, €3.75bn, midpoint of the range of the Conseil d'analyse économique (Council of Economic Analysis, 2025), which puts the revenue loss from abolishing the ISF at between €3bn and €4.5bn, mechanical effect only (lower and upper bounds). Benchmarks: €3.2bn, ex ante revenue loss from converting the ISF into the IFI according to the impact assessment of the PLF 2018 (Senate general report); €4.5bn net from the IFI according to a press summary of the France Stratégie evaluation committee (2022 counterfactual). The 2026 yield of the tax on holding companies depends on the text adopted; the ISF and this tax partly bear on the same assets (declared overlap). Minimum tax of 2% on wealth above €100m (« taxe Zucman »): costed and added at the upper end of the estimates, €15bn to €25bn (about 20, « avec une marge d'erreur d'environ 5 milliards » [“with a margin of error of about 5 billion”] according to Public Sénat), a static estimate by its promoters alone (the economists heard, including Gabriel Zucman), taken up in the reports of the National Assembly (no. 930) and the Senate (no. 689); it is the only static estimate read of the scheme adopted by the National Assembly in February 2025. The administration has not simulated it: the DGFiP stated that it could not do so, for lack of a valuation of financial and business assets. The estimate starts from the Challenges ranking (€1,228bn for the 500 largest fortunes in 2024) and a current tax rate of about 0.3% of wealth. Estimates that take into account exile, optimisation or the deduction of corporate income tax are much lower, €2bn to €5bn: if corporate income tax were deducted, the yield would fall to €2bn or €3bn according to Antoine Levy (cited by the Senate); the figures of about €5bn in circulation take into account exile and optimisation, or this deduction; according to the Senate report, the departure of the three largest fortunes would halve the yield; the Institut de l'entreprise (2026) speaks of a yield « divisé par quatre » [“divided by four”]. CAE Focus no. 118 does not cost this tax (it simulates tax exile for tax increases of €2bn and €4bn). The amount counted is therefore the top of the range, to be read as such. As a differential tax « tous impôts confondus » [“all taxes combined”], it would yield slightly less if the ISF were restored, since the ISF paid on the same assets would be deducted; no source read measures this common share, and the two amounts are added together. A floor limited to billionaires is not costed.

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.

This lever in the method · Costing for François Ruffin

  1. « C'est le début d'un long chemin avec vous » (discours, blog), 13 April 2025. Words of François Ruffin. Position taken from public statements, not from a written programme. Read the source (« C'est le début d'un long chemin avec vous » (discours, blog)).

Contest this encoding (prefilled email; procedure and deadlines)