The objective is clear: France must be able to emerge with its head held high from a dreaded meeting, set for the end of 2027 before the European Commission. Brussels risks torpedoing the dock dues, a customs duty on imported products inherited from the 17the century, still in force in the overseas departments. Regarding this French exception to free competition, supposed to protect local economies, the Court of Auditors demanded, Tuesday March 5, through its first president, Pierre Moscovici, a “deep, systemic, managed and naturally concerted reform”.
With 1.6 billion euros collected in 2022, the tax represents a major revenue and rising sharply since 2014 for overseas communities – 32% of their overall resources and up to 57% of municipal operating expenses. But today it is accused of increasing the cost of living. The government would like to replace it with a regional VAT, announcing a rapid reform “for the 2025 finance bill”which arouses strong opposition from overseas elected officials.
Considered a “breakup scenario”the replacement of dock dues by VAT is rejected by the Court, in a report published TuesdayFor “his extreme sensitivity” policy. In unison, the leaders of the communities of Mayotte, Guyana, Guadeloupe, Martinique and Reunion rejected this idea on February 14, before the overseas delegation of the National Assembly. “The dock dues are the last element of our fiscal autonomy”said Patrick Lebreton, vice-president of the Reunion executive. ” VAT ? We know very well that, when a recipe goes to Bercy, the return home is much more difficult. We will not be compensated. We do not understand this rush to reform in 2024.”
Capping the tax sustainably
The Court of Auditors carried out an overall assessment of the dock dues, removing all defects: “lack of leadership” by the state, “excessive complexity” and “instability” rates affecting products, “low transparency”, “undetectable economic impacts”. According to Mr. Moscovici, “it favors companies already in place which master the system, and does not promote competition”. As for the fiscal autonomy of communities, it is considered ” strong “ for the regions, but “non-existent” for the municipalities which nevertheless benefit from three quarters of the tax revenue. Municipalities “decide neither on the base, nor on the rates, nor on the exemptions, nor on the criteria for distributing the resource”specifies the report of the high financial court.
You have 40.17% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.