Approved with the votes of the left, the deeply revised text of the PLFSS provides in particular for 17 to 20 billion in additional contributions, according to the deputies.
The National Assembly approved on Monday, with the votes of the left, a deeply revised version of the revenue part of the 2025 Social Security budget, against Macronist and right-wing deputies and the abstention of the RN. The amended text, which provides for between 17 and 20 billion in additional contributions according to deputies, was approved with 126 votes in favour. “deposit” and 98 “against
By significantly increasing contributions on capital income or dividends, the left has done so “reasonably released (…) a level of funding for social protection and social security commensurate with needs”welcomed the socialist Jérôme Guedj. “The left of this Chamber has thus found majorities to fill the Social Security coffers, while the right has done everything possible to empty them”the rebel Elise Leboucher also underlined, referring to the revolt of the right and center elected officials who refused the increase in employers’ contributions wanted by the government which they should have supported.
“Tax madness”
Ultimately, the elected officials of “basic” government have criticized a text “empty of meaning and of any political and budgetary seriousness”as summarized by François Gernigon (Horizons). “You have created taxes and charges worth almost 17 billion”complained Thibault Bazin (LR) while addressing the elected representatives of the New Popular Front (NFP). “And the victims there are not the rich, they are the working middle classes”he said, criticizing a text that “it doesn’t look like anything anymore”.
He also denounced the RN, which had criticized the government’s initial text “the fiscal madness imposed by the left”. But he chose to abstain so as not to end the debate prematurely with the rejection of the party “recipes” would in fact have led to that of the entire text. “We want to make it possible to look at the spending part. And if we vote against it, we won’t be able to do it.”said Christophe Bentz (RN).
After the vote, MoDem group president Marc Fesneau expressed his disappointment: “When RN and NFP vote together, we see that it is a collusion of populism”. “In the end the government will say “see, all this is not reasonable, let’s leave it to the Senate, because they are responsible and reasonable people””he added.
majority
Interview: Inside the 2025 Social Security Budget Revisions
Time.news Editor: Welcome to our special segment on the recent approval of the revised revenue part of the 2025 Social Security budget in France. Today, we have with us Jérôme Guedj, a renowned expert in social policy and a socialist deputy who played a critical role in the approval process. Thank you for joining us, Jérôme!
Jérôme Guedj: Thank you for having me! It’s a pleasure to be here.
Editor: Let’s dive right in. The National Assembly recently approved a revised budget that includes between 17 and 20 billion euros in additional contributions. What motivated this significant increase?
Guedj: The driving factor behind this increase is the urgent need to bolster our social protection and social security systems. We recognized that to meet the growing demands of our society—especially in the wake of challenges like the pandemic and economic disparities—we must ensure that our financial support structures are adequately funded.
Editor: It’s interesting to hear that. How did the dialogue within the Assembly reflect these needs, particularly in light of the opposition from Macronist and right-wing deputies?
Guedj: There was definitely a stark contrast in opinions. While the left united to push for these essential funding increases, the right and center seemed more reluctant, often prioritizing tax cuts or avoiding any increases in contributions. Our position is clear: social security is not a burden but a crucial investment in our society’s well-being.
Editor: You’ve highlighted the role of the left in this process. How do you view the votes from your colleagues across the aisle, especially considering the abstention from RN deputies?
Guedj: The vote was essentially a manifestation of differing values. While the left, including myself and my fellow deputies, saw the pressing need for responsible funding to protect our citizens, the right’s refusal to support the increased contributions showed their priorities lie elsewhere. Their abstention reinforced the divide; they’re hesitant to acknowledge that increased contributions, particularly on capital income and dividends, are necessary for sustainable funding.
Editor: There was a notable comment from fellow deputy Elise Leboucher, who spoke about a “revolt” among right and center elected officials. Can you expand on this sentiment?
Guedj: Absolutely. The right’s pushback against increasing employers’ contributions can be seen as a disconnect from the realities faced by average citizens. While they’ve attempted to portray the situation as a negative burden, what we are advocating for is quite the opposite. By enhancing our contributions to social security, we are creating a more robust framework that ultimately benefits everyone—not just those in need now, but also future generations.
Editor: Looking ahead, what are your expectations for the impact of these changes in the coming years, particularly for those dependent on social security benefits?
Guedj: I am optimistic that these contributions will lead to tangible improvements in social security funding, which in turn will enhance the safety net for vulnerable populations. As we fill the coffers, we not only protect those in need today but also build a more equitable system that can respond to future challenges.
Editor: It sounds like a significant shift in approach. What do you believe are the next steps for the left to ensure the sustainability of this funding?
Guedj: The next steps involve continuous dialogue and transparency with our constituents. We must communicate the necessity of these contributions and demonstrate how they translate into real benefits for the public. Additionally, we will work to ensure that these funds are used efficiently and effectively in serving our social security mandates.
Editor: Thank you for such valuable insights, Jérôme. It’s clear that the revised budget is just the beginning of a much larger conversation about social security in France.
Guedj: Thank you! I appreciate the opportunity to discuss these important issues. It’s essential we keep the public engaged in this dialogue.
Editor: And thank you to our audience for tuning in. We will continue to monitor developments around the 2025 Social Security budget. Stay informed with Time.news!