But the budget situation in France does not stimulus

"When the building goes, everything will," said the popular adage. The construction of additional housing indeed leads to creating or safeguarding of 1.5 employment over eighteen months. And it is true that, over the period 2005-2007, real estate argued the growth at nearly 30. Unfortunately, it will increase from 435.000 housing construction in 2007 less than 350,000 in 2008, while there are political and technical consensus to say that it should be 500,000. If the engine represents real estate continues to slow, the recession will be inevitable. The second quarter of 2008 has already revealed a decline in GDP by 0.3, a decrease of 2.9 of the investment of households and the destruction of 45,000 jobs. The necessary measures been taken in the area of the home ownership and production of social housing. But this is insufficient. But the budget situation in France does not stimulus.

In this context, a sector deserves special attention, that rental investment: investment to the fluidity of the housing market and generally financed on credit without personal contribution indeed begins reporting the equivalent of two VAT: a tax receipt for the State (19.6 VAT on the price HT of the property) and even roughly the equivalent of this VAT in social security contributions on wages of the workers of the building and its environment.

The investor then enjoys a "depreciation tax" (Robien or Borloo) over nine years which represents roughly a shortfall for the State equal to the amount of VAT for households that are taxed at 30 marginal rate, a little more to those taxed at 40, but only half situation blatantly unfair for those imposed at 14, which constitute the majority of investors in recent years.

This very positive balance of public accounts all combined pockets (2 VAT) hosted on the eighteen months of construction, to 0.5 to 1 VAT paid on the next nine years is better if one takes into consideration local taxes, as property tax and the tax generated by investments correspond approximately to 0.5 VAT during these nine years, and continue to be seen beyond the ninth grade.

Must that housing is built. However the mechanism influenza: sales expected to drop in 2007 estimated at less than 40,000 in 2008, and probably even less in 2009 if nothing is done. This mechanism is influenza because, due to the increase in the cost of construction and that of the credit, monthly savings effort to consent was, for the same, multiplied by 2.5 over five years! This excludes de facto the middle classes of rental investment, thereby depriving them of a precious instrument of savings.

In short, the device current (Robien Borloo) is unfair and less and less effective. It is an urgent need to replace it with a mechanism of "tax credit", inspired by what was implemented in 2007 for the home ownership, and which would allocate the same advantage (for example 19 HT of the property with a ceiling in absolute value and prices as today a staggered over nine years), regardless of the fiscal position of the capitalist.

It resolvabiliserait the middle classes (14 of marginal tax rate taxpayers) giving them an incentive equal to a VAT instead of a demi-TVA under the current regime; would partially resume building and thus to preserve jobs. The mechanism would remain virtuous for the public accounts: VAT paid during the nine years of the device is always preceded by the two VAT redeemed during the eighteen months of construction, and partially offset by local taxes to the tune of a demi-TVA over the nine years.

The Act of mobilization on housing and the fight against exclusion (Act Boutin) which will be discussed soon in Parliament could be the opportunity of this reform. It rightly plans to freeze construction on saturated areas. On tense areas, it could restore colors to a tax incentive mechanism which is now tipped to breath. Geographical focus, better financial attractiveness on tense areas, tax fairness, positive impact on the public accounts and the economy of the country: who says better