Financing the ecological transition? This is a subject that has sparked debate within the majority and even more so since the publication by France Strategy of the report by economist Jean Pisani-Ferry and Inspector General of Finance Selma Mahfouz. A report whose observation is generally shared by the majority, but which has, when it comes to its recommendations, its supporters and its detractors.
It is in any case a report that will continue to feed the reflection of the majority, and more broadly of the Parliament: before being heard this Wednesday by the finance committee of the embly then by that of sustainable development at the beginning of July, Jean Pisani-Ferry, who is due to debate with the former minister and deputy (Renaissance) Eric Woerth on the subject in “L’Obs”, was invited this Tuesday afternoon by the deputy Renaissance David Amiel, to discuss with elected officials of the majority.
The opportunity for the economist to return to the whole report, to refute the idea of a green ISF, as his proposal was described – “it’s a misinterpretation”, he defends -, but also to insist on certain points on which, he believes, the report is “a little incomplete”, such as competitiveness or the way in which private funding can replace public funding.
Equitable distribution of efforts
“This meeting has no stronger meaning than that. But many of us within the group want to investigate an explosive political question for the years to come, advances the deputy for Paris Gilles Le Gendre. While integrating the need to sanctuary the pillars of Bruno Le Maire’s supply policy and not to compromise the subjects it has already won, we cannot remain deaf either to the debate on inequalities which agitates the country, nor to that on the fair distribution of the considerable efforts to be made to make the ecological transition a success. Without demagoguery, but with lucidity,” he explains.
“This is the subject of the year and the years to come”, insists Jean-Marc Zulesi, president (Renaissance) of the embly’s sustainable development committee, who, like others in the majority, phosphorus on all-out funding avenues for the next budget discussion. “We must not give the impression that we are going back on the very pro-business policy that we have carried out, let’s look for new incentive recipes”, explains Jean-Marc Zulesi who pushes the idea of a “dividend green”, a little like what the MAIF develops , but with a tax incentive and control over the funded projects. “When a company commits to green dividends, which therefore finance transition projects, it would then be necessary to lower the corporate tax rate (IS) and raise it on the others”, he suggests. .
Eric Woerth pleads for a “double ban: the increase in debt and compulsory levies”. But he is working on a battery of tracks: from “marking a green part of VAT”, for roughly 14 billion and at constant taxation, with, therefore, the key, a reduction in expenses, to an “ecological bonus” on the IS for companies that would invest mively to transform their mode of production. Or even a stabilization of France’s debt at 110% but including more loans linked to the transition and therefore a reduction in debt elsewhere. President of the delegation to local authorities, Thomas Cazenave is working to remove the obstacles to green investment in local authorities, via a bill on green debt and the generalization of green budgets.