For the State it defends itself partially

Play the Cassandras deficit and public debt is now a somewhat agreed exercise. Simple common sense leads any rational economic operator to anticipate hard times: cups dark and increases of levies. Question is soon pleased: before or after the presidential elections in 2012 A EUR 140 billion, the budget deficit gives Vertigo from the depths. Almost half of the State expenses will be funded to credit this year. Beside, the 30 billion of the social security deficit seem little.

The figures are misleading. The deficit of social schemes (2.3 of GDP in 2010) is more serious, more systemic, more worrisome. Contrary to what should reaffirm Eric Woerth today to the National Assembly, in opening the debate on the Bill for social security funding, this deficit is almost exclusively structural. For the Minister of the Budget, the social security deficit related to the crisis would be three-quarters of the 2010 deficit. Best: the structural deficit next year would be stabilized "autour of EUR 8 billion". The name "crisis deficit", invented last year for the State budget, is thus duplicated without complex in the social sphere. With backdrop of the idea that growth is returning, the crisis deficit would gradually disappear. It would therefore contain the natural increase in spending. This reasoning does not.

For the State, it defends itself partially. The collapse of tax revenues has been no common measure with the recession, corporate tax constituting the most flagrant illustration: Bercy awaiting less than 20 billion euros this year, against 50 billion previously. This amount is likely to be found at the end of the legislature. Even exceeded if a free recovery occurs. In addition to the revenue effect, stimulus spending will be stopped. And if those departments stagnant in volume, there is what hope closer structural State, estimated deficit to 50 billion euros by the rapporteur of the Budget in the Assembly, Gilles Carrez. In addition to the fear of a relapse or a soft recovery, the main uncertainty, but it is in size, lies in the evolution of the debt burden.

On the side of social security, there is no uncertainty. The lost revenue will not return. Mechanically, there will be, a rebound of the CSG on heritage products. But will fly next week dues, which remain the main source of funding. The precedent of 2002-2003 is instructive: low growth (nothing to do with the recession of 2009) and the rise unemployment had reduced the increase in the wage less than 2 from 5 to 6 during the boom years (1999-2001). As spending prancing, a deficit of 10 billion is immediately apparent (against a slight surplus in 2001). And all the efforts of the following Governments control of spending, increases in levies, reimbursable, etc., allowed to stabilize this deficit. Revenues have found a good level of evolution... equivalent to spending.

History repeats itself on a much larger scale. Payroll is clearly back this year, an unprecedented event. And 2010 will be scarcely better. Beyond that, the job will end by reset, but will allow, at best, not further widen abyssal deficits. The Government agrees, since he formally table a hole of 30 billion in 2013. An optimistic since forecast based on a progression of the wage by 5 per year between 2011 and 2013 with a "partial catch-up growth delays." A deficit that remains stable in a period of relative expansion, this is called a structural deficit. For the response, that is 30 billion must be found and not 8. This implies very large-scale reforms, side as side revenue expenditure. Another precedent shown well: between 1992 and 1994 revenues were leaded and social security had plunged. He was in was followed the Juppe plan.