Presented as an instrument to correct fiscal injustices, the Zucman tax deeply divides the French political class. Between redistributive ambitions and economic fears, this project reveals the ideological fault lines of a France in search of balance between social justice and international competitiveness. Analysis of an emblematic reform with multiple stakes.
A measure to target great fortunes
The Zucman tax, proposed by ecologists and supported by part of the left, targets assets exceeding 100 million euros. It specifically concerns 1,800 tax households in France. Its objective is to ensure a minimum tax of 2% on these fortunes, aiming to prevent tax optimization often highlighted by its defenders.
This initiative is based on the research of the famous economist Gabriel Zucman, a world-renowned specialist in issues of tax evasion and economic inequalities. Inspired by the work of the EU Tax Observatory, the proposal was adopted by the National Assembly in February 2025, then rejected by the Senate in the following June.
The break with fiscal liberalism
This tax represents a break with the liberal fiscal doctrine prevailing for several decades. Its defenders see it as a necessary return to redistributive taxation, capable of correcting growing disparities. The Institute of Public Policy points out that, paradoxically, the wealthiest sometimes display effective tax rates lower than those of the middle classes.
However, some economists, like Sylvain Catherine and Gilles Raveaud, challenge the methodology of these studies. They assert that the French tax system remains largely progressive, especially when including the generous social transfers of the French model.
The senatorial rejection: a deep ideological divide
The rejection by the Senate on June 12, 2025, clearly illustrates the left-right divide. The left sees it as a lever for social justice, while the right and center fear a negative impact on investment and competitiveness. Senator Emmanuel Capus notably criticizes the ideological nature of the project, emphasizing that it could unfairly penalize entrepreneurs and start-ups, potentially forced to sell illiquid assets.
This concern is even more acute because the affected assets often include shares in innovative companies, whose values fluctuate significantly without necessarily generating sufficient liquidity to pay the tax.
The contested vision of wealth: flow or stock?
The debate also crystallizes around the very definition of wealth. For opponents of the tax, it is based on an erroneous view of wealth as a static stock. However, wealth is rather a dynamic flow: it is constantly built, destroyed, and reinvested. According to them, a tax that is too heavy could freeze the economy and discourage the risk-taking necessary for economic growth.
Conversely, supporters emphasize the urgent need to correct growing inequalities, which they believe threaten social cohesion. They recall historical precedents, such as the solidarity tax on wealth (ISF), abolished by Emmanuel Macron, which remain popular in a public opinion sensitive to fiscal justice.
A political debate far from over
The government, however, announces working on an alternative, more moderate project to address the concerns expressed by entrepreneurs. Left-wing parties promise to revive the proposal during a future parliamentary session, demonstrating their determination to keep the pressure on this subject.
Meanwhile, civil society is organizing: a support petition has already gathered 60,000 signatures, with backing from figures like economist Jean Pisani-Ferry. Through these mobilizations, France could join an international dynamic aiming to establish a global minimum tax on great fortunes, in line with the recent international taxation of multinationals.
The major challenge of asset transparency
The effective implementation of this tax also raises a major technical challenge: the administrative capacity to accurately assess assets, particularly financial and professional ones. Currently, the Insee and the tax administration do not yet have fully adapted tools, which implies heavy investments in information systems and a significant strengthening of human and technical resources.
This operational challenge fuels additional doubts among the detractors of the tax, as they fear excessive administrative intrusion into citizens’ private affairs.
Fiscal justice or political symbol?
Ultimately, the Zucman tax has become much more than a simple fiscal device: it embodies a deep ideological confrontation over the French and European economic model. Between fair redistribution and the preservation of entrepreneurship and economic attractiveness, the debate remains lively and complex. One thing is certain: the taxation of the ultra-rich will continue to mark the French political agenda for a long time.