In France, the resident card costs 1500 euros per year!

So there you have it, my dear friends, France is on the brink of financial ruin. Who would have believed it? With its 3,200 billion euros of public debt, one could almost believe that the country has decided to compete in the debt Olympics. And guess what? They are well on their way to winning the gold medal!

Faced with this economic disaster, the brilliant political minds have set out to find solutions. And as usual, they have taken out their favorite magic wand: taxation. But this time, rather than attacking the eternal "rich" and "rogue bosses", they have decided to aim at a new target: foreigners in a regular situation. Because what is better than making those who have already made the effort to integrate legally pay?

The reasoning behind the proposal

According to Charles Prats, immigration costs France between 14 and 24 billion euros per year. With around 5 million legal foreigners on French soil, this would represent an average cost of 3,000 to 5,000 euros per person. His solution? Make the people concerned pay half of this sum themselves. After all, why not? If we follow this reasoning, each individual should compensate for the "cost" that they represent for society.

But wait a minute. Are the French being asked to pay an additional tax to offset their own cost to the state? Hospitals, schools, roads… All of this has a cost, and everyone benefits, right? So why specifically target foreigners?

A question of tax justice?

Charles Prats talks about "tax justice". He believes that immigrants benefit from public services financed by French taxpayers and that it is therefore normal that they contribute more. But isn't that already the case? Foreigners who work in France pay taxes, social security contributions, VAT on their purchases... In short, they already participate in financing these services.

Furthermore, imposing a fixed tax of 1,500 euros per year, regardless of income, seems unfair to say the least. For someone earning the minimum wage, this is a considerable sum. For the wealthiest, it is a drop in the ocean. We are far from the progressiveness of income tax.

And what about undocumented immigrants in all this?

Let's talk about undocumented immigrants. Those who don't have a residence permit, but who have sometimes lived and worked for years in France. They also contribute to the economy, often in precarious conditions. Some are calling for regularization, with the obtaining of a residence permit that would allow them to come out of the shadows. But with a tax of 1,500 euros per year, we risk dissuading a lot of people.

Let's imagine for a moment that we extend this tax to regularizations. That would amount to making already vulnerable people pay for the right to live legally in France. Not sure that this is the best way to promote integration and social cohesion.

The “occupations in demand” residence permit: a solution for undocumented immigrants?

Speaking of undocumented immigrants, there is another piece of the puzzle that deserves to be mentioned: the “occupations in demand” residence permit. The government recently proposed creating a specific residence permit for undocumented workers who work in sectors with labor shortages. The idea is to regularize the situation of those who, despite their illegal status, already contribute to the French economy by occupying positions that few people want to take.

I think this is a rather pragmatic approach. After all, if these people are already integrated into the economic fabric and meet a real need, why not give them the opportunity to do so legally? This would fill gaps in sectors such as construction, catering or agriculture, while offering better protection to these often exploited workers.

But with proposals like that of Charles Prats who would like to impose a tax of 1,500 euros per year on holders of residence permits, one wonders if this "jobs in tension" permit does not risk becoming a poisoned chalice. Undocumented workers, often in precarious situations, could hesitate to come forward if it means burdening themselves financially. We could miss an opportunity to regularize thousands of people ready to officially contribute to society.

Finally, this “occupations in tension” residence permit could be a breath of fresh air in an often tense debate. It would offer a solution that is both humane and economic, by recognizing the value of these workers while meeting the needs of the labor market. But for this to work, we should avoid putting obstacles in their way with punitive taxes or Kafkaesque administrative procedures.

The financial transfer tax: a double punishment?

As if that were not enough, Charles Prats also proposes a tax of 33 % on money transfers to countries that refuse to cooperate with France for the return of foreigners under an Obligation to Leave French Territory (OQTF). The idea would be to put pressure on these countries via their diasporas.

But in practice, who would be penalized? Families who remained in the country, often dependent on these remittances to meet their needs. This would affect the poorest, those who work hard to help their loved ones. Is it really moral to take them hostage for diplomatic reasons?

Stigmatization of immigrants

What bothers me most about this case is the underlying stigma. Presenting immigrants as a "cost" to society is forgetting that they also bring a lot. Culturally, economically, socially. Diversity is an asset, not a burden.

Certainly, France has major budgetary challenges. But is it by pointing the finger at a part of the population that we are going to resolve them? Wouldn't it be better to seek inclusive solutions, which mobilize all the actors of society without excluding some?

The reality of the figures

Let's analyze the figures put forward by Mr. Prats. He estimates that immigration costs France between 14 and 24 billion euros per year. This is an impressive figure, certainly, but it must be put into perspective. According to INSEE, in 2020, France's GDP was around 2,300 billion euros. So even taking the high estimate of 24 billion, this only represents around 1% of GDP.

Moreover, these figures only take into account costs, not benefits. Immigrants work, pay taxes, consume, create businesses. According to some studies, the overall impact of immigration on the economy would actually be positive in the long term.

The Boomerang Effect

Let's imagine for a moment that this tax were implemented. What would happen? Many legal foreigners could find themselves unable to pay. Result? They would lose their residence permit and fall into illegality. We would therefore end up with more undocumented immigrants, exactly the opposite of what France is trying to achieve.

Moreover, this measure could discourage the skilled workers that France needs. In a globalized world, these talents can choose where to settle. Why would they choose France if they are asked to pay an additional tax of 1500 euros per year?

The Diplomatic Puzzle

And what about the proposal to tax money transfers to certain countries? It is an idea that seems to completely ignore diplomatic realities. International relations are already complex enough without adding this kind of punitive measure.

Moreover, these remittances are often a more effective form of development assistance than official aid. They go directly to families in need, bypassing bureaucratic intermediaries. Taxing them could have negative consequences for sending countries, potentially worsening the conditions that drive people to migrate in the first place.

The Way of Reason

Ultimately, Charles Prats' proposal seems more like an emotional reaction to a complex problem than a thoughtful and viable solution. France needs solutions to straighten out its public finances, that is undeniable. But these solutions must be fair, realistic and take into account the long-term consequences.

Rather than targeting a specific population with a punitive tax, why not think about broader reforms? Improving the efficiency of public administration, fighting tax evasion, investing in innovation and training… These are avenues that could bring more sustainable and more equitable results.

In conclusion, I would say that Charles Prats' proposal is symptomatic of a worrying trend in politics: the search for simple solutions to complex problems. Immigration and public finances are issues that deserve in-depth reflection, not cut-and-dried answers.

France has always been a welcoming country, a country of human rights. Rather than seeking to make legal foreigners scapegoats for our economic problems, we should seek to make the most of their presence. After all, diversity has always been a strength for France. Let us not forget this in our search for solutions to our economic problems.

And who knows? Maybe one day we will realize that the true wealth of a country is not only measured by the state of its public finances, but also by its capacity to welcome, integrate and prosper thanks to the diversity of its population. Until that day, let us continue to debate, reflect and seek solutions that elevate us all, rather than measures that divide us.

Because in the end, whether we were born here or elsewhere, we are all in the same boat. And this boat, my friends, needs us all to row in the same direction to avoid sinking. So, instead of looking for who to make pay, let's look for ways to move forward together. Maybe that is, finally, the real solution to our problems.