The concept of deferred salary must be assessed in this light

In his column on September 22, entitled "Social VAT, consecration of capitalism", Paul Fabra is engaged in an exercise of vilification by assertion without demonstration. It is named for two people: my colleague Philippe Marini, rapporteur-General of the Senate Finance Committee, and myself. If it is evidence of some verve, however it cannot hide a few flaws in his argument. If it can be arithmetically correct, there nonetheless economically wrong...

First of all, it should be noted that social VAT is intended to reduce contributions social employers and to switch part of the financing of social security to the VAT. Thus, in a global economy, we can evolve a system taxing production system taxing products, that have already included the Denmark and the Germany. Which will result in an improvement of the competitiveness of goods produced in the national territory and will reduce the cost of the work. It will thus be a righteous way to continue the policy of reduction in payroll taxes, which allowed to create hundreds of thousands of jobs.

Beyond the quarrels of figures, there is a consensus on the fact that such a measure would have a positive impact on employment and would cost nothing to public finances. In these circumstances, why Paul Fabra hostility to such a measure

His single economically serious argument, although debatable, is drowned in the article: Paul Fabra opposes the principle of the reduction of the cost of the work, considering that such a policy would be harmful to growth. This argument is admissible in a situation of full employment, if one reasoning over long period. However, can we really support that it has already "too is", with an unemployment rate which is still of the order of 9 of the population active In addition, it is surprising the contradiction between the title of his column and the main argument used, that is to say that one prefers to focus on growth rather than employment: for the time, it would be the consecration of capitalism!

Other statements are also questionable. First cliché: VAT would not "social". The argument is well known: modest people spend the entirety of their meagre resources through consumption, and pay the fee proportionately. Conversely, those who have large incomes can save and don't pay VAT on their consumption. But it is a little quickly forget that they are, moreover, subject to tax on the income, which is progressive. It is now time to break the taboo that affects VAT and fallacious developments that it accredits! One that uses products and services from elsewhere is exonerated from any participation in the financing of social protection. -Is this fair I do not think so.

The analysis developed by Paul Fabra then ignores the evolution of the mode of financing of our social protection. It is certainly funded by the social security contributions, but also and how increasing by the tax, for almost 30. In addition, it should be noted that the Fund for amortization of the social debt, which has the mission to discharge the debts of the social security is financed by the tax.

This increasing fiscalization of social security resources reflects an evolution of the philosophy of it. Paul Fabra was surprised as well that can be characterized as "social" the need for health. I persist and sign. In advocating social VAT, it's also distinguish between what is a logic of insurance branches age and accidents at work of which falls within a logic universal the disease and family branches. It is therefore most companies, the era of globalization, to continue financing the solidarity. The concept of deferred salary must be assessed in this light.

Far from being a "consecration of capitalism", social VAT thus appears as a way to save our system of social protection and promote employment, the challenges posed by a global economy. Have the courage to break certain taboos: of VAT as that of relocations.

This is the reason why I continue to advocate for this way of the future! I thank Paul Fabra to live the debate.