As part of its analysis of the programs of the main candidates for the presidential election, the Institut Montaigne published this Monday, March 21, a decryption of the feasibility and costs of the pension reform projects presented by seven competitors in smooth .
Between the supporters of an extension of the retirement age (Macron, Pécresse, Zemmour), intended primarily to rebalance the finances of a system in deficit, and those of a primarily social reform, providing for contrary to a restoration of this retirement age to 60 years (Mélenchon, Roussel, Le Pen), two “conceptions” of the pension reform oppose each other: one of investment and expenditure, the other of reduction of the digging public finances.
Reforms that cost…
As for the “spending” reforms, according to the think tank, the two projects that would be the most expensive to implement are those of Jean-Luc Mélenchon, whose cost is estimated at 85.8 billion euros per year by 2027 (not quantified by the candidate), and of Fabien Roussel, estimated at 87.7 billion euros per year, a figure almost twice as high as that put forward by the candidate of the Communist Party, who estimates that his project would cost between 30 and 40 billion euros per year.
Marine Le Pen’s proposal would also be much more expensive than the candidate assures: restoring retirement at age 60 at the full rate with 40 annuities and increasing the minimum old age would cost 26.5 billion euros per year, against 9.6 billion euros according to the candidate. In addition, the re-indexation of retirement pensions on inflation, which is not quantified by the candidate, would require an additional effort from the State of 11.2 billion euros per year, estimates the Institut Montaigne. .
On the side of the representative of the socialist party Anne Hidalgo, who intends to increase the net amount of the minimum old age to €1,000 and that of the minimum contributory to €1,200, the impact on public finances would be 2.6 billion euros per year. by 2027. Again, the project has not been costed by the candidate.
… and those that reduce the public bill
Among project leaders whose objective is to achieve savings, the Institut Montaigne’s estimates are also less optimistic than the projections established by the candidates, at least with regard to the effects of these reforms in the short term. : Emmanuel Macron, who proposes to push back the retirement age to 65, and claims 9 billion euros in savings from 2027, the think tank estimates the effects of his reform at 7.7 billion euros in 2027, then to 18 billion euros per year by 2032.
Valérie Pécresse’s project, quite similar to that of the president-candidate, could result in 7.5 billion euros less in the state budget in 2027, then 16.2 billion euros per year from 2030, according to the Institute, while Madame Pécresse ensures that these €16 billion less would be achievable from 2027.
Finally, Eric Zemmour’s proposal, which is based on a gradual increase in the legal retirement age to 64 and an alignment of the various schemes between public and private, should only result in 10.7 billion euros. savings, calculates the Institute, an amount almost half that claimed by the candidate, who quantifies his reform at a reduction of €20 billion per year from 2030.
Unsurprisingly, the vast majority of projects presented by candidates will have to go through the law box and a mandatory consultation of the social partners, notes the Institut Montaigne. Whether in terms of expenditure or savings, the costing of these reforms will therefore be totally dependent on the timetable for their adoption. It will also be correlated with the end of the legislative exercise, the passage of which before the Assemblies will necessarily modify the contours of the projects presented. These changes will be more or less substantial depending on the political color of the next majority in the National Assembly.