2026 Budget: "The blank year is a rather silly cutback that allows us not to think," says Philippe Juvin, LR MP for Hauts-de-Seine.

Prime Minister François Bayrou is set to announce the broad outlines of the 2026 budget at 4 p.m. this Tuesday, July 15, with $40 billion in savings to be made. Planned savings include $35 billion in cuts to public spending and $5 billion in tax increases. Philippe Juvin, LR MP for Hauts-de-Seine, is the political guest on "La Matinale" to discuss this.
With $40 billion in savings to be found to boost France's budget, François Bayrou is due to deliver his report on Tuesday, July 15, announcing his roadmap for the 2026 budget. The Prime Minister could announce new tax increases, contrary to Emmanuel Macron's promise not to increase the French people's contribution. Philippe Juvin, the Republican MP for Hauts-de-Seine, was questioned about this contradiction by Alix Bouilhaguet on "La Matinale" on Tuesday, July 15.
This text is a transcript of part of the interview above. Click on the video to watch the full interview.
Alix Bouilhaguet: At 4 p.m., François Bayrou will announce the broad outlines of the 2026 budget. As we know, there are approximately 40 billion euros in savings to be made. There's talk of 35 billion euros in savings in public spending and 5 billion in tax increases. Doesn't that go a bit against Emmanuel Macron's promises that there would be no tax increases for any French person?
Philippe Juvin: First of all, no one knows the Prime Minister's plan.
He didn't let you in on the secret, into his confidence?
He didn't call me to tell me what he was going to do. Besides, I think he worked pretty much alone to avoid leaks. And now, the debate afterwards—this is the Prime Minister's plan—will take place in Parliament, the Assembly, the Senate... And we'll see what we decide to take from this plan. The priorities, in my opinion, are first of all to spend less, very clearly. We spend more than elsewhere. Spend better: we have spending that is not effective, or only slightly effective. And to work more, we have to work more. If we worked as much as in Germany, two OECD economists published a very interesting document a few weeks ago. If we had the employment rate, the number of hours worked, which are those of Germany, we would not have a deficit this year.
In this "work more" section, François Bayrou is apparently considering eliminating a public holiday. Does that seem like a good idea to you?
We are in the process of implementing things. Eliminating a public holiday will not resolve the issue. When you compare with your neighbors, you see that, when you take the number of hours worked in the country, you divide it by the number of people of working age, well, it's 15 to 16% fewer hours worked in France compared to the European Union. With, second observation, two categories of people who work much less than elsewhere: these are young people and what we call seniors over 60 years old.
There are also avenues. There will also be greater recourse to part-time work, opening up regulated professions, I'm thinking in particular of bakers, who cannot open seven days a week... There too, are these interesting avenues?
To think that on Sundays, a certain number of artisan businesses cannot open because there are rules restricting them is absolutely absurd. But we must also ask the fundamental question: why do the French work less than elsewhere? Are they lazy, or is there something else? I don't believe the French are lazy. On the other hand, there are two issues. First, we have a social system that discourages work. And second, we have too many taxes. So, you're going to ask me: what's the connection? Simply, the French work less because they are intelligent. They understood that the more they worked, the more they were taxed, and that beyond a certain amount of work, work was no longer worth it. The entire system discourages work. By lowering taxes, very massively, you will encourage people to work and then, what will you create? The conditions for new tax revenues, etc.
There's also talk of a possible blank year, meaning a freeze on all social benefits and pensions, the income tax scale, and civil service salaries, without taking inflation into account. Does that seem like enough to you?
First, it's not up to scratch. We consider that a blank year , if it were fully implemented, would be in the order of 15 billion euros. I think it's 17 billion, depending on what you put in. We'll say between 13 and 17 billion euros. We need 45. It's important, it's an interesting tool. But, first, we can't freeze all spending; there are expenses that we won't freeze. For example, France's contribution to the European Union. It's an international treaty that sets the amount and is revalued each year. For example, every year, we pay interest on the debt. We're not going to tell our lenders: 'Watch out, this year we won't pay you back more, since we're more indebted than last year.' So, everything can't be frozen. Second, I think it's useful because it has a very significant leverage effect. But, third, you can only do it once. You're not going to do it every year. I remind you that the 45 billion needed this year will be needed next year, and in two years. And, finally, it's a rather silly planing measure that allows us not to think. The real issue is how we redraw the contours of state intervention. That's the issue that will allow us to make savings in the long term.
Thirty thousand households, including the wealthiest, are reportedly in the crosshairs of a new, long-term plan to combat tax evasion. Is this a red line for Republicans?
No. I think that today, we have to be reasonable and serious. We're in a government, we're not going to start drawing red lines everywhere. My philosophy is that I think we need to lower taxes, spend less, and work more. That's the philosophy. Afterward, we'll see how we do it. I'll simply tell you one thing: taxing the richest, first of all, we already do that. 75% of the tax is paid by just 10% of French people. And secondly, last year, we were given the trick of a tax on very high incomes, you know, which was supposed to affect 66,000 people. In the end, it only affected 16,000 people. Quite simply because the very rich, as they say, are already very, very hard hit and very, very solicited. And in any case, this type of tax will only bring a drop in the ocean to the real issue. The real issue is, if you work more like in Germany, again, I repeat, there is no longer a deficit. And secondly, we have a structure of state spending that is much more expensive than elsewhere.
To pass this budget and avoid censure, François Bayrou constantly calls for the responsibility of political parties. Will the Republicans be "responsible"? Will Laurent Wauquiez, who also leads the group in the National Assembly, be "responsible"?
Yes, we will be responsible. The proof is that we decided to participate in the government even though we don't agree on everything. It's a coalition government. I think that the Republicans don't have so many red lines; they have principles. And I ask the government, I ask the Prime Minister to take these principles into account. Afterward, we will assume our responsibilities. But the question we must ask ourselves is: would the country behave better if it didn't have a government with a motion of censure or with a government and an imperfect budget?
Click on the video to watch the full interview.
Francetvinfo