The two scenarios have drawbacks acknowledges in Bercy

Measure the aversion to the risk of the majority and to test the opinion: it is this that is preparing to François Fillon and François Baroin presenting, today in Bercy, two scenarios of reform of the tax on capital. The first has the merit of simplicity, but it is conservative: it is up to alleviate the current scale, by removing the tax of the 300,000 taxpayers subject to the first tranche of the ISF (0.55) and reducing very strongly to the more affluent, located in the three last slices (read below), will be very affected by the removal of the tax shield. It would solve two aspects considered to be the most problematic Lai: a confiscatory for the richest rate and a threshold of entry become too low. "Many taxpayers have been caught by the value of their principal residence." Is it fair that the French should be subject to the ISF ", launched Christine Lagarde, yesterday, the National Assembly. This option does not create the enthusiasm, but elle reassured members of Parliament, particularly in view of the second scenario which is proposed to them.

In fact, it implies a real tax revolution, which is is based on a priori no model in the world. It would be to tax progression of wealth not wealth itself. A household who holds 2 million euros from January 1 the heritage and the fact build 200,000 euros during the year would be taxed on this added value, including if it does not exercise it (sale of assets, shares, etc.).

In the light of the reactions of members of Parliament, at the end of their meeting with François Baroin yesterday evening, this scenario is unlikely to win membership. "I am completely hostile to this measure that will lead to immense perverse effects." "This is the opposite of a good tax", indicates the rapporteur UMP of the budget to the Assembly, Gilles Carrez. "This is interesting, not reported, but much too complex", fears Philippe Marini, his counterpart in the Senate. Tax revenues would also be much more random because the Government would do nothing else that anticipate revenues on future gains. "Want to pay the tax in advance, it takes long-term budgetary risk", is concerned about the MP Hervé Mariton. "There would be many years where there would be no revenue crisis!" ", note the centrist Jean Arthuis, who"is not a plant to gas"and is, like many others, on the line to a suppression of the ISF accompanied by the creation of a higher income tax bracket.

The two scenarios have drawbacks, acknowledges in Bercy. In both cases, households will be required to make a declaration of heritage - an important symbolic aspect. In both cases also, the Government maintains a taxation of heritage as such - whether of the whole or its progression-, and non-income it generates, which was yet objective by Nicolas Sarkozy.

"The Government may support the reverse, the second option is to maintain the ISF, limiting it to changes in value," said Philippe Marini. "I will not vote neither one nor the other of these two formulas", slice Jean Arthuis.

But the Government wants to believe that the political advantage of the reform will be forgetting these few disadvantages: in both cases, there will be more taxation under heritage EUR 1.3 million. Under the seal of the "tax justice", the reform lies not the people who do not pay the ISF today, and it will allow a "transfer of tax to the wealthy households", promises Bercy. In fact, affluent households are better grow their wealth than other taxpayers. Capital gains on the heritage are, therefore, significantly more concentrated that heritage itself.

Two weeks of the cantonal elections, the Government is less verbose on the manner in which it intends to finance reform. Just indicates wish to promote a fairer taxation between classes of assets. Life insurance, which is among the less taxable products, is clearly threatened.