This issue of the pace of the recovery Jn

The last points remaining in the pension reform should be disposed of this evening, a meeting which will bring Nicolas Sarkozy, François Fillon and Eric Woerth. Raising the legal age is certain, at least 62 years, but the terms were still set yesterday. Starting with the rate which will be retained for reform. While it seemed almost acquired - Eric Woerth formally referred to a lengthening of a quarter by generation last month-, Executive hesitation between this scenario and a slightly faster hypothesis, with an increase in four months of age. This track, which is now more likely, is defended in the Government by Christine Lagarde, the Minister of the economy. In the majority, it is pushed by Jean-François Copé, the pattern of UMP deputies.

Reduce deficits faster

In the first case (a quarter per generation), leads to a legal age 62 years in 2020 for the generation born in 1958 and 63 years in 2025 for the generation born in 1962 (see chart). The second scenario leads to the 62 years two years earlier, in 2018 (generation born in 1956) and 63 years in 2022 (generation 1959). The reduction of the deficits would be faster than in the quantifications performed by the Board of pensions, which build on a shift to a quarter of a year. "The additional gain is several billion euros per year on the horizon of 2020," said a government source. "It would be a step more toward the Medef," reacts Eric Aubin (CGT). The patronat advocates a half a year.

This issue of the pace of the recovery Jn.8:32 by the Government of the clear view of an age of target-62 years, 62.5 years or 63 years - on a specific date. In the case of a passage to 63 years, the pace could be slower (for the period between the ages of 62 and 63). Remains as to whether reform apply well as early as January 1, 2011 (as initially announced) or a few months July later (1 for example). Entry into force in January could pose problems for insured persons intending to go to beginning of the year and must perform the steps several months before.

Outstanding contribution

Another point which left to mediate yesterday evening: contribution on high incomes. By focusing on an increase in tax on the income of the richest households, the Government wants to avoid complicate the tax landscape. The Elysee Palace should be the last tranche of the income tax, from 40 to 42 for example (the rate remains at stalling), via an exceptional contribution, which would mean a tax increase for nearly 1 of tax households (or approximately 350,000), declaring more than 69.783 euros per share. It could also - but it is less likely - create a sixth the income tax bracket, even more targeted. This surcharge of some hundreds of millions of euros will not be taken into account in the calculation of the tax shield. The measure is not without disadvantages: paradoxically, the more affluent households are not all in the last instalment of IR. "Exceptionally high" income of taxpayers pay any tax, or even get a cheque for the tax authorities by the family quotient set and tax cuts, said Gilles Carrez (UMP). Some of them would be nevertheless caught by another tax on capital income. The Government should raise the fixed levy at source (1.1 billion euros), which hits investment income (shares, bonds, Treasury bills, bank interest...) when their holder decides not to submit them to the IR. Rates could increase from 18 to 20. A 2 point increase would bring EUR 110 million.

Pensions hats, that the Ministry of labour would like to see deleted, should be preserved, but they will be even more taxable. The pension reserve fund could finance deficits accumulated between 2011 and 2020.

The retreats on lesechos.fr/dossierlesechos.fr/dossier site