Gabriel Zucman is a polarising personality - the 38 year-old, currently Professor of Economics at the Paris School of Economics and Research Professor at the University of California, Berkeley, has been in the spotlight for his views on why taxing France’s elite could be the answer to the country’s debt crisis.
A tax evasion expert and author of several books*, his research focuses on global wealth and income inequality. The Connexion spoke to Professor Zucman, who is also director of the EU Tax Observatory, at an Anglo-American Press Association meeting online.
The interview took place in the days before parliamentary debate on the tax, which ended on Friday without its adoption as part of the 2026 Finance Bill.
However, Prof Zucman strongly expressed his conviction that, despite ongoing opposition from the current government, it is an idea whose time has come and which has wide support in France.
Seeking tax justice in France
He insists it is not acceptable that the ultra-rich - people with fortunes of €100million or more - pay proportionally less tax on their income than anyone else via tax optimisation strategies.
His solution – the ‘Zucman tax’ – would require them to pay at least 2% in total of their wealth each year in tax.
If they are already doing so, via a combination of income tax and property wealth tax, then they would pay no more – but if they are not then they would be required to pay up to this amount.
He says it is a matter of tax justice, and that most people in France agree.
His position is strongly favoured by the Socialists. However, it is strongly opposed by the government as well as centrist allies and the right, on the grounds that a tax assessed on all wealth including from shares in businesses may harm productivity.
France’s richest man, Bernard Arnault, claims it would “destroy the French economy”.
Prof Zucman argues this is not true, and that the vast majority of centi-millionaires would be able to afford the tax.
He says it is much more palatable to most French people than solutions currently proposed by the government to fight debt. These include freezing the income tax bands, pensions and benefits, and cutting back tax allowances or health reimbursements – “a long list of trying to find money here and there from pretty much everybody except the super rich”.
“Is that sustainable?” he said. “It has not worked well for the two previous prime ministers. It is likely if it continues like that, it will be difficult to have a budget, the government will fall, and we will have to try again.”
He further argues against the idea of tempering the tax as proposed by some left-wing MPs in ongoing debates over the 2026 finance law to reduce the public deficit. Suggested alternatives have included a “light” version which would see the tax start at €10million, but with exclusions including shares in ‘family firms’ or in ‘innovative’ sectors.
No form of the Zucman tax was included by the government in its finance bill, but several amendments were put forward for versions of it.
Billionaires pay less than everyone else
Prof Zucman said he has studied wealth for 15 years and has identified that “billionaires have much lower tax rates than other social groups”.
A study at Berkeley found that US billionaires paid about 23% of their income in tax, all taxes included, while the average American paid 30%. Similar studies, including in Paris, found that “everywhere, we see the same picture”.
“In France, it's particularly extreme. The average person pays 51% and for billionaires, on average, it's 25%, so they pay half as much (in percentage terms).”
This came as a “revelation” and encouraged him to think of solutions, he said.
His proposal to create a minimum level of tax for wealthy individuals is akin to similar measures for multinational corporations.
The proposal was included in his report commissioned by Brazil during the country’s presidency of the G20 group of developed nations last year.
Since then, a number of countries have begun to create a “coalition of the willing to continue the discussion” and he believes more will join. The UK and California are among places looking at new taxes on billionaires, he said.
Assemblée nationale voted for it in February
In February 2025, a law proposed by Green MPs in favour of the Zucman tax passed in the Assemblée nationale due to abstention by the far-right. However, it was then rejected in the majority right-wing Senate.
It has become high-profile once more due to support by the left.
“They are fighting for it, but are also open to compromise. But my view is that the proposal itself is already a compromise,” he said.
“It comes from the G20 and putting on the table a proposal that everybody could agree on, a kind of minimal standard that should be consensual. The idea is not to make the rich pay more than the rest of the population, it is to ensure they cannot pay less
“I think everybody agrees with the notion that the super-rich should pay at least as much. They shouldn't be allowed to pay less than other social groups.
“The 2% rate was computed precisely to reach this minimal objective. Of course, the taxpayers that will be affected have responded very strongly in France and have mobilised to try to fight it.
“Hence why, even though it is popular with 86% of French people supporting it, you still have quite strong opposition in parliament.”
Measure estimated to bring in about €20 billion
He said it would bring in about €20 billion.
France has a “very serious public finance problem”, with a budget deficit of 5.4% of GDP, and to stabilise it “we need to reduce it by around 2-2.5 percentage points over the medium term”.
“So, €20 billion is not enough to solve our public finance problems. But it is a significant amount. Secondly, it is going to be very hard to increase taxes for other groups of the population or to slash spending as long as billionaires pay half as much in tax as the average person.
“That is why I believe this is a tool for budgetary stabilisation and that it will begin a process whereby we can solve our problems.”
He said the current level of French public debt – 116% of GDP – has only been reached three times before, before the Revolution and just after the two world wars.
But won’t the very rich just move elsewhere?
Asked if the very rich may not simply leave, or threaten to do so, Prof Zucman said the solution would be to make the tax payable for a number of years after people leave. The proposed law that passed in February outlined five years of ongoing liability, but it could be set higher, for example at 10.
The US, notably, goes on taxing its citizens for life, though this is an extreme example, he said.
“We do not need to go that far, but at present the French system is the opposite – you leave and immediately stop paying taxes in France.”
Asked if persuading other countries to adopt the measure is key to success, Prof Zucman told The Connexion that he presented it to G20 finance ministers last year.
Some were very positive – such as Brazil, but also France, who have supported it at international level, he said.
The US under Biden was also open to it, and had a similar proposal called the billionaire income tax.
Other countries reported needing time to consider the new idea.
“The process is moving forward in national finance ministries all over the world; they are taking it seriously. That includes in the EU, but you need unanimity by the 27 member states for any common tax policy at EU level. Hence it would take a lot of time.”
Exemptions ‘would be a mistake’
Prof Zucman said his proposal is open for discussion and improvement. However, the Socialists are proposing exemptions.
“They want to exempt stakes of more than 50% in companies, even big publicly-listed ones. I think that’s dangerous as it was done before with the French ISF wealth tax [since replaced with IFI], and the consequences was the tax worked very poorly.”
“It failed to tax the super-rich. On the eve of its abolition in 2016, the effective rate for French billionaires was 0.005%. I’ve been struck by this failure, hence I propose drawing lessons from this. If you want to have something that works – that generates revenue and restores justice in the tax system, you need a tax without exemptions.
“That was the idea of starting at €100million in wealth, not €1million like with the ISF. You start very high, and in exchange you say ‘if someone has €100million they are obviously really wealthy and should be able to pay this floor of 2% without the need for any exemptions and deductions.
“My warning to the Socialists is: do not repeat the mistakes. If you want to effectively tax billionaires you must have a clear-cut floor. Any exemption takes the risk of tax optimisation – these people have advisors who will help them look for loopholes.”
If no form of the tax is adopted the risk is that the budget and political stalemate will continue, he said.
“This only targets those among the super-rich who pay very little today. If you refuse to do that and instead say ‘ok, we will freeze benefits for low-income workers, for retirees… it is impossible to get people to accept a budget like that.”
The fact it is a ‘minimum’ tax is the big difference compared to previous forms of wealth tax, he explained. “You start from what people already pay in other taxes”.
Asked about those who have very highly-valued companies but are comparatively ‘cash-poor’, Prof Zucman outlined that “the vast majority” of those concerned have enough liquidity to pay, as the majority of very rich people obtain around a 6% return on their wealth.
In the very rare genuine cases there are ways of dealing with this, as are used to help people pay inheritance tax. These include being able to pay over several years, paying in kind (eg. by giving artworks etc), or paying in company shares.
“At some point either the firm is going to start making a profit, or the person will no longer fall into the bracket to pay the tax.
“I have met many start-up founders and have never heard one say they were really worried about how much tax they might have to pay if their wealth exceeds $100million.
“So many other things matter to innovators, such as the quality of public infrastructure, skills of the workforce etc. And I think with the revenues of the 2% tax it would generate money that can be invested in universities and everything that is needed for a vibrant economy.”
Opposition to the measures
Asked about French billionaires’ opposition, he said part of it can be seen in media articles saying the tax would be “terrible for the economy”, as “80% of newspapers are owned by billionaires”.
“They use their influence on the media, prevailing ideologies and policy makers,” he said. “But this is not resonating with the public. There is a disconnect between popular support – among people of all political stripes, even 90% of Macron or LR voters, and 75% of RN voters – and what we see in the Assemblée nationale from Macron’s party, the right and the RN.”
Prof Zucman said that his discussions with MPs had revealed some from the government parties were open to the idea, but said the president and prime ministers had been impossible to convince.
Asked by The Connexion why we see this refusal to listen to popular opinion, Prof Zucman said: “That’s frankly a question for them - why do they choose to ignore what their own voters say?
“And it's not just one opinion poll, it's very many polls that have been conducted and this kind of this demand for tax justice is something that's expressed very strongly in France, in towns, in villages, everywhere.
“We saw it with the gilets jaunes movement, that started with the abolition of ISF – which I’m not supporting as it had all kinds of problems – and replacing it with new levies on gasoline etc. It unleashed a deep feeling of unfairness that has been there for years.”
An estimated 1,800 people would pay the tax, he said.
Of these, much of their wealth is in easy-to-value publicly listed corporations, while those with shares in large private businesses are also “not very hard to value”, by comparing them to similar publicly-listed ones.
The administration of the tax would therefore not be very costly, he said. It would also have no effect on multinationals’ investment in France, as it is not a tax on companies.
Prof Zucman predicts that his idea will gain ground, but it may take time.
He compared it to the introduction of income tax, which was proposed in 1907 and passed in 1914, taking a total of seven years.
* Prof Zucman has a new book out this month: Les milliardaires ne paient pas d'impôt sur le revenu et nous allons y mettre fin. It has not been translated into English yet. His previous books include The Hidden Wealth of Nations: The Scourge of Tax Havens and The Triumph of Injustice: How the Rich Dodge Taxes and How to Make Them Pay.
