The Minister of Cities and Housing, Vincent Jeanbrun, speaking to the press on Friday, said he wanted an electric shock to make investor households want to acquire rental housing again. Furthermore, when the gap between his amendment to the draft budget for 2026, estimated to be weak by professionals in the sector, and his intentions, was objected to, he argued for the role of parliament in finding the right balance. Nothing is going well in France in terms of rental offerings, both new and existing. The number of investments has been divided by ten in the new since the end of Pinel, and almost by two in the old, undoubtedly under the effect of the rental bans and of course because of the tax pressure – national and local. In this context, while we have known what needs to be done for years, the government and its minister in charge of housing threaten to hit two pitfalls, that of empty words and that of inappropriate haggling.
Empty speech first. What danger is this? It consists of repeating loud and clear that the situation of the rental and investment market is catastrophic and that the government is not going to skimp…and to table an amendment without any effectiveness, which will not bring in any investors in new buildings and excludes old ones. In short, offensive speech is supposed to hide the reality of an action that is not offensive. Semiology has established the performative dimension of speech, particularly political: we speak and write about reality…which remains what it is. Even more so in this case, and according to the words of the Prime Minister himself, the government maintains that it is leaving it to parliament to refine the copy: why is it not itself doing what it believes is good and which has won all the votes of the sector for years?
A political trap
The other danger is precisely the bargaining between the government and parliament, starting with the National Assembly from November 13. The desired and desirable system is a depreciation mechanism, associated with other variables such as the envelope of land deficits attributable to the overall income or the compulsory rental period. In short, several sliders that can be adjusted as desired. Thus, starting from a 2% linear annual depreciation rate, the government could agree to 2.5% for example, thus getting closer to the 3.5% of the parliamentary amendment inspired by the Daubresse-Cosson report… Seriously, will the revival of a major sector take place thanks to bargaining? Imagine the medical prescription of three antibiotic tablets per day for five days, which the pharmacist reduces by half in order to save money… The only problem lies in the absence of curative effect. The dosage is as important as the choice of medications. The carpet merchant discussions – without wishing to offend this honorable profession, unfairly stigmatized by this popular expression – that the government suggests and will orchestrate are unworthy of the issue and of the French households who cannot find rentals.
It is also a political trap. The government will have a good time, agreeing in the best case scenario to slightly increase the rate of 2% that it is proposing, undoubtedly by multiplying the criteria weighing on the lessor to limit eligible housing, to say that it has done what it had to and that this is of course the balance of all accounts. It will no longer be necessary to ask him anything, and it will take years if the system lacks power before the State reopens the file and reviews the poorly adjusted variables.
The government has set a very low benchmark
The therapy is far from being prescribed and administered yet. MPs should not consider that the minister’s most vigorous expression is enough to demonstrate that the government is aware of the seriousness of the situation, particularly in Bercy. They must also not allow themselves to be locked into a discussion on the depreciation rate or other variables from which they are already the losers: by writing a minimalist scenario, the government has set a very low benchmark which will remain the reference for negotiation.
The sector is counting on deputies who are clear-eyed about the evils of the sector: they are numerous and honorable. Many of them also lack political experience and malice… Purity is not the only virtue that allows you to win battles.
