Nathalie Goulet is a senator for Orne (UC) and vice-president of the Law Commission.
While the National Assembly finishes the examination of the last budget of the five-year term of Emmanuel Macron, the senatorial majority of right and center seeks, on the eve of the presidential election, a strategy of avoiding the debate, with the support socialists. Oh, of course, the principles are respectable. The budget is disingenuous, there is no need to look at it.
Two options are then available to the High Assembly, either a "preliminary question" which would mean that the Senate would examine neither the receipts nor the expenditure, or a rejection of the article of balance and of the first part, c 'that is to say of the receipts, which
ipso facto would
entail the rejection of the text and the end of the budgetary discussion, even before the examination of the second part, that is to say of the expenditure.
Electoral budget, trompe-l'oeil budget, “whatever it costs” budget: all in all, a budget obviously struck by insincerity as noted by the High Council of Public Finances.
Can we be satisfied to see the results of the tax audit more than halved between 2014 (€ 19.3 billion in adjustments and penalties) and 2020 (€ 8.2 billion)?
Nathalie Goulet
Should the Senate and its majority, aided by the Socialists, dispense with an examination? I don't think so, but I must be in the minority. The examination of the budget constitutes an essential mission of the Parliament, not expressing itself would deprive it of it.
The budget is the ultimate trap in an election year. Indeed, avoiding increasing revenues, and therefore compulsory levies, is an exercise that we know well. But on spending, how could the right hand demand greater rigor while demanding more tax loopholes, more spending on health, education or more spending for local authorities? To be rightly moved by the abysmal deficit of France and a policy of "whatever the cost" on the backs of future generations, denounce with reason the weight of the debt and an insincere budget, but be "in" at the same time ”very happy when millions rain down on our infrastructures and our hospitals (with the Ségur de la santé, in particular). Jupiter's trap!
Should we consider, for example, that the Government should not be questioned about its lack of policy against tax fraud and tax evasion?
Can we be satisfied to see the results of the tax audit more than halved between 2014 (€ 19.3 billion in adjustments and penalties) and 2020 (€ 8.2 billion)?
Can we be satisfied with the organized dissection of the customs services and lose an opportunity to question the results of the tax police instituted against the opinion of the Senate last year?
Can we also be satisfied with the lack of control of short-time working and VAT fraud?
Read alsoBudget 2022: "The rigor will wait"
In short, the budget is also an opportunity to take stock of the human and financial resources put in to fight against fraud in public finances, while the Social Security budget has been particularly discreet on the means of combating social fraud (with the exception of the only modest article 15), and that the State, and therefore taxpayers, guarantee social organizations. Organizations whose leaders are totally irresponsible, given that their responsibility is not engaged in the event of mismanagement ...
The budget is also the time to question the Government on what it is hiding from us, these small expenses well hidden under the carpet, a budgetary taqîya in a way: the art of dissimulation.
I am talking here about off-balance sheet commitments, which can be defined as public financing obligations to third parties whose existence will only be confirmed by the occurrence, or not, of uncertain future events outside the state control.
I had already alerted on this subject to off-balance sheet commitments, pointing out their opacity, and the disastrous consequences that could result in the event of an economic crisis.
Nathalie Goulet
I had already alerted on this subject in 2019, pointing out their opacity, and the disastrous consequences that could result in the event of an economic crisis.
We are told that their consolidation would not make sense when it comes to simple guarantees.
I'm not so sure ...
These off-balance sheet commitments take various forms. They can be a guarantee for loans contracted by companies, commitments for social benefits due to disabled adults, commitments made under project contracts between the State and the regions ... Their valuation methods are also very miscellaneous: present value of pensions due to employees in post or in retirement with unchanged legislation until their death for retirement commitments; amount of the subsidy voted in the finance law for the following year for subsidies to RFF and SNCF, zero amount for the State's liability in the event of a nuclear disaster.
The annex to the State's general account distinguishes four: “commitments made within the framework of well-defined agreements”, “commitments resulting from the mission of economic and social regulator of the State”, “obligations resulting from of the involvement of the State's responsibility ”and the“ State pension commitments ”.
1 - Commitments made within the framework of well-defined agreements, i.e. € 320bn in “debt repayment guarantees” as of December 31, 2020. The most notable were allocated to banks in return for PGE (€ 100bn), to the European Financial Stability Fund (€ 75 billion) for loans raised as part of operations to support euro-zone States in difficulty, to the management company of the social home ownership guarantee fund (58 € billion), Unédic (€ 44 billion) and Dexia (€ 25 billion).
“Guarantees linked to missions of general interest” are also part of the commitments made within the framework of agreements.
Their total is not indicated insofar as some are not quantified, like the guarantee granted by the State to the Caisse centrale de réassurance for certain exceptional risks.
Not quantified, we think we are dreaming!
Read also David Lisnard: "Deficit and public debt, this vertiginous bill that will have to be paid"
However, some guarantees are. Thus, deposits by individuals on regulated savings accounts (€ 487 billion at the end of 2020) and guarantees from which BPI France assurance export benefits under the credit insurance of companies that it manages on behalf of the State (€ 53 billion ), are added “liability guarantees” corresponding to: callable and not yet called capital of multilateral development banks (€ 65 billion); the European Stability Mechanism (MES, for € 126 billion); commitments made under State-region contracts (€ 6 billion); loan commitments given to the IMF and not drawn by it (€ 42 billion); budgetary commitments (in the sense of budgetary accounting: commitment authorizations consumed) relating to operations for which the service provided has not yet taken place (€ 77 billion),which notably include long-term contracts for the purchase of military equipment (€ 61 billion).
2 - The commitments arising from the mission of economic and social regulator.
These commitments relate to the discounted cost of the balancing subsidies that the State provides to special pension schemes (SNCF, RATP) for a total of € 524 billion (including € 249 billion for the railway workers' scheme) by 2021. .
The commitments resulting from the mission of economic and social regulator also include commitments in respect of the public energy service, in particular vis-à-vis producers of electricity from non-renewable energies.
Interesting when you know the fluctuation of the markets ...
3 - The unspecified obligations resulting from the engagement of the responsibility of the State.
This concerns in particular the obligations of the State in the event of a nuclear disaster or its obligations for possible clean-up of the land and installations of which it owns.
4 - State pension commitments.
They mainly concern its civil servants and the military (for € 2,619 billion as of December 31, 2020), La Poste civil servants (€ 149 billion) and workers in state industrial establishments (€ 49 billion).
It is high time to put an end to these practices which would not be acceptable for a company.
Debt is our common burden, that of future generations.
Nathalie Goulet
Nathalie Goulet
To these commitments, we must also add the guarantees given by the State during the health crisis.
There, dear reader, know that it is Inspector Colombo that we need.
The absence of consolidated data borders on a treasure hunt!
In the general State account, which is very dense, we find a breakdown of the beneficiaries of loans guaranteed by the State on page 15 of the document.
It is indicated that the most important commitments concern Air France KLM for € 3.6 billion and Renault for € 3.6 billion as well (as of December 31, 2020).
To list all the EMPs granted to very large companies, there is unfortunately no other choice than to do a manual search in the official journal, in order to find the orders of the Minister of the Economy, Finance and of the Relaunch.
We are talking about more than 7,872,584,000 euros, or seven billion eight hundred and seventy-two million five hundred and eighty-four thousand euros, granted to sometimes non-European banking establishments for loans granted to known establishments, major brands, or smaller companies.
Read alsoBudget 2022: where has the level of public spending gone?
Without drawing up an inventory à la Prévert, the popular saying "you can find everything there as in Galeries Lafayette" could not find a better application, because precisely the Galeries Lafayette benefited from an EMP to the tune of 300 million (December 23, 2020).
465 million were allocated by decree of December 31, 2020, granting the State guarantee to a loan granted by various establishments to the Lagardère SA joint-stock company.
- A small 20 million for SAS Relay @ ADP.
- 160 million for the loan granted to the company Proman Expansion in application of article 6 of law n ° 2020-289 of 23 March 2020 on amending finances for 2020.
- 100 million for the loan granted to the company Chantiers de l'Atlantique.
- 135 million for the loan granted to the company Holding de Restauration.
- 100 million for the loan granted to the company CONFORAMA FRANCE SA.
- 150 million for the loan granted to the company Axéréal Finances in application of article 6 of law n ° 2020-289 of 23 March 2020 on amending finance for 2020.
- 140 million for the six loans granted to the company EMIL FREY France TRESORERIE SAS in application of article 6 of law n ° 2020-289 of 23 March 2020 on amending finance for 2020.
- 115 million for loans granted to six subsidiaries of Groupe Bernard Hayot (GBH) in application of article 6 of law n ° 2020-289 of 23 March 2020 on amending finance for 2020.
- 280 million for the loan granted to the company Nexans SA in application of article 6 of law n ° 2020-289 of 23 March 2020 on amending finance for 2020.
- 477 million for loans granted to ACCORINVEST SAS, in application of article 6 of law n ° 2020-289 of March 23, 2020 on amending finance for 2020.
And the list is still long.
This subject is less promising than the incessant and nauseating debates on immigration or Islam, but it is a decisive subject for the future of France.
Nathalie Goulet
In short, a number of holding companies and large brands, such as FNAC or Castorama, have benefited from these loans guaranteed by the State.
This practice of the EMP was undoubtedly very useful, but when one examines the list carefully and the amounts guaranteed, one can wonder about the conditions of granting of these loans and the conditions which were set, in particular in terms compliance, payment of dividends, bonuses or simply whether or not these companies and their subsidiaries are in tax havens.
In terms of the risk for the involvement of guarantees, because that is what it is about, it will be necessary to follow the reimbursement procedures and the Senate Finance Committee would be well advised to entrust its special rapporteur with a mission on this subject to inform the national representation during the review of the budget for 2023.
It is high time to put an end to these practices which would not be acceptable for a company.
Debt is our common burden, that of future generations.
Off-balance sheet commitments are commitments and as such the State is likely to be called in execution of a defaulting debtor.
While progress has been made on off-balance sheet commitments, the lack of control over spending and debt continues to be of concern.
This subject is less promising than the incessant and nauseating debates on immigration or Islam, but it is a decisive subject for the future of France.
Bring back our spending and debt, including off-balance sheet commitments neatly stashed under the carpets of government departments.
Massively fight against fraud in public finances and the tolerances of aggressive optimization practices.
I am waiting for the candidate who will address these questions and offer us transparency solutions and I will vote for him ... and you?