“On a subject as essential as the cost of labor”Patrick Martin then accused the ministerial teams of “not going to the end of the reflection”. In short, to start suggesting trying to reduce the multiple exemptions enjoyed by bosses, especially big ones.
For fear of not having been immediately and completely heard, faced with the procrastination of the ministers required by Barnier to present saving measures which are not 100% at the expense of workers and retirees, the president of Medef clarified his wishes, on November 16, in the columns of Parisian. He did not fail to say, in passing, that the reduction in exemptions could lead to a procession of job losses; as if the announcements of layoffs were not already widely topical, without the slightest connection with reductions in employer contributions which we are only talking about.
Before the finance bill began to be examined in the Senate, Patrick Martin straight away proposed replacing these planned reductions in employer contributions with an equivalent increase in VAT. This additional taxation would have been used to finance the social share currently paid by the bosses. The bosses, supposed to play the game honestly in a world of care-bear capitalists, would have reduced their sales prices excluding tax, and consumers would have seen nothing but fire, since the increase in VAT would have been compensated by a reduction in the base price. Perhaps they would even have been winners, according to Martin!
Unfortunately, faced with the rather thick string, the Minister of the Budget felt obliged, if only to remind us of its existence, to refuse the proposal while reassuring these gentlemen the bosses: the requested reductions in employer contributions will pass through his proposed budget of 4 billion to 2 billion euros only. Knowing that the total amount of these reductions has doubled in ten years to reach 80 billion, employers can actually dry their tears.
1. Labor Cost: Can you provide your perspective on the current state of labor costs and its impact on businesses, both small and large? Do you believe that reducing exemptions for employers would lead to increased job losses?
2. Alternative Solutions: Regarding Medef’s proposal to replace employer contributions with an increase in VAT, what are your thoughts on this solution? Is it feasible or does it pose any challenges for businesses? Additionally, do you think this approach would be equitable for consumers and workers?
3. Government Intervention: How should the government balance the need to control expenditures and maintain social security benefits, while ensuring businesses remain competitive? Do you think the proposed reduction in employer contributions will actually benefit businesses in the long run?
4. Effectiveness of Exemptions: In light of recent announcements of layoffs in France, should the government reevaluate the effectiveness of existing exemptions and their contribution to job creation? Are there alternative measures that could be more effective in supporting businesses and promoting job growth?
5. International Comparisons: How do French labor laws and tax policies compare to those of other countries? Could France learn from best practices in other countries to improve its approach to labor costs and job creation?
