2027 Presidential Election: What the First Major Economic Debate of the Medef Candidates Reveals

Marine Le Pen promises €125 billion in savings, Édouard Philippe wants to eliminate €50 billion in production taxes, Gabriel Attal intends to bring net pay closer to gross pay, Bruno Retailleau wants to allow people to move beyond the 35-hour workweek, Raphaël Glucksmann proposes increasing taxes on "mega-inheritances," while Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Marine Tondelier advocate a much more social and environmental break. Eight months before the presidential election, the first major economic debate between the main declared candidates primarily revealed profoundly opposing visions of work, debt, business, and the role of the state.

It was one of the most anticipated political events of the autumn. On Thursday, August 27, the Meeting of French Entrepreneurs (REF), organized by the Medef at Roland-Garros, concluded with a first debate bringing together seven of the main declared candidates for the 2027 presidential election: Marine Le Pen, Gabriel Attal, Édouard Philippe, Bruno Retailleau, Jean-Luc Mélenchon , Raphaël Glucksmann and Marine Tondelier.

This event was all the more symbolic as the Medef (French Business Confederation) had placed this edition under the banner of "courage," less than a year before the presidential and legislative elections. The employers' organization had previously surveyed some 66,000 business leaders and highlighted several major concerns: taxation and social security contributions, public debt, administrative simplification, and reindustrialization. The Medef notably indicates that 81% of the executives surveyed consider reindustrialization a priority for the next five years.

For over two hours, the candidates debated their plans on debt, pensions, wages, taxation, industry, standards, and Europe. And while almost all of them promised to reindustrialize the country and simplify its operations, the similarities largely end there.

Marine Le Pen is playing the card of budgetary rigor and the "liberation" of businesses

Marine Le Pen probably delivered one of the most revealing interventions regarding the evolution of the National Rally's economic discourse.

The candidate first sought to reassure business leaders, stating that those who had become aware of the RN's economic plan had "nothing to worry about".

She announced above all that she would present, before the next budget debate, a trajectory representing 125 billion euros in savings to restore public finances.

For Marine Le Pen, French debt has now reached a critical point, threatening the very sovereignty of the country. According to her, the debt is creating a "snowball effect" that could gradually deprive France of its freedom of action.

A significantly more orthodox tone on budgetary matters than some proposals historically defended by the RN.

On industry, Marine Le Pen also promises a particularly spectacular measure: abolishing production taxes.

It also intends to make greater use of public procurement to favour companies based in France.

But it was on the issue of standards that she was most aggressive.

When Bruno Retailleau proposed removing around a hundred standards deemed absurd, Marine Le Pen replied that it was necessary to go much further and remove "thousands of over-standards".

In particular, she denounces the French tendency to add national constraints to the minimum rules decided by the European Union.

According to her, this "regulatory madness" has represented €25 billion in tax losses over the past ten years . This figure, put forward during the debate, should, however, be accompanied by its precise methodology before being considered a consolidated assessment.

The candidate therefore promises, upon her arrival at the Élysée Palace, a "series of decrees" intended to eliminate what she calls a "paper tax".

On the issue of labor costs, Marine Le Pen, however, was cautious. She acknowledged that French wages are too low and taxes too high, but argued that the state of public finances no longer allows for a massive and immediate reduction in contributions.

She prefers to act on households' unavoidable expenses, particularly energy, notably with a VAT rate reduced to 5,5%.

Le Pen is clearly seeking to broaden her economic image

The message to employers is clear: the RN wants to appear less as the party of redistribution than as the party of economic sovereignty, of reducing spending, of simplification and of lowering regulatory constraints.

This is probably one of the important political developments revealed by the debate.

Bruno Retailleau proposes the most radical break with liberalism.

While Marine Le Pen sought to reassure entrepreneurs, Bruno Retailleau aimed to speak directly to them.

The president of the Republicans describes a "bureaucratic" and "voracious" state , which he wants to transform into a state "at the service of businesses".

He even refuses to speak simply of reform and calls for a "break".

Among his strongest proposals: allowing companies to move away from the 35-hour week.

Working hours could be negotiated directly between employers and employees.

"You can leave the 35-hour week if you wish," he promised the entrepreneurs.

Retailleau also believes that the French economy is missing the equivalent of three weeks of work per year compared to some European neighbours.

On pensions, he wants to go even further by automatically linking the retirement age to changes in life expectancy , according to a mechanism he says he wants to present soon.

The LR candidate also wants to reduce social security contributions and significantly tighten the aid system.

He therefore proposes to cap total social benefits at 70% of a reference income in order, according to him, to restore a sufficiently significant difference between work and inactivity.

A proposal that immediately caused a great deal of division, summarized by this formula:

"I don't want there to be so little difference between those who get up early and go to work and those who get up later and don't work."

Another break with the past: on the transfer of businesses, Bruno Retailleau wants to go beyond the Dutreil pact alone.

In the case of a direct family transfer, the principle would be simple: as long as the business is not sold, no tax would be paid.

“No cash, no tax,” he summarizes.

Édouard Philippe wants to cut 50 billion euros in taxes… and 50 billion euros in aid.

Édouard Philippe presented a more classic right-wing managerial approach, based on reducing spending and increasing the volume of work.

The former Prime Minister believes that France must "put its accounts in order" without raising taxes.

To achieve this, he believes it will be necessary to work longer , particularly with regard to pensions.

According to him, French social spending remains too high compared to other European states and therefore constitutes the main source of savings.

But his most spectacular proposal concerns businesses.

Édouard Philippe wants to eliminate 50 billion euros in production taxes.

And unlike many announcements of unfunded tax cuts, he immediately specifies how he intends to compensate for this measure: by simultaneously eliminating 50 billion euros of aid to businesses.

In other words, less taxation, but also less subsidies.

This is probably one of the most economically structuring proposals in the debate since it amounts to profoundly changing the financial relations between the State and businesses.

He also promises to maintain in full the Dutreil pact , dedicated to the family transfer of businesses, and to end the temporary surtax targeting large companies.

On wages, Édouard Philippe also wants to "bring gross to net", but through a deeper reform of social protection financing: according to him, this should rely more on the entire population and less exclusively on work.

Finally, the former Prime Minister is already warning that the 2027 budget, which will be voted on before the presidential election, will probably be bad and adopted under "abominable conditions".

In the event of victory, he therefore promises to immediately revise the budget trajectory.

Gabriel Attal is banking on the "right to gross income" and ten years of tax stability

Gabriel Attal also sought to position himself on ground favorable to entrepreneurs, while assuming a form of self-criticism of Macronism.

He specifically acknowledges three failures: the economic consequences of the dissolution, the housing crisis, and the inability of successive governments to truly simplify the economy.

"When our entrepreneurs falter, France falters," the former Prime Minister summarized.

On salaries, Attal reiterates his concept of "right to gross pay".

Its objective: to reduce the deductions directly affecting employees in order to gradually bring their net pay closer to their gross salary.

This reduction would be financed by savings on social spending and by a more comprehensive reform of social protection financing.

Attal also calls for accepting that the majority of future savings will have to be made in the social sphere.

He believes that simply adjusting a few parameters is no longer sufficient.

Regarding pensions, he advocates a system which he presents as universal and more free , including in particular a capitalisation pillar.

In tax matters, Attal primarily wants to restore visibility.

He proposes, starting in 2027, a ten-year fiscal and economic programming law , specifying in advance the major developments in French taxation.

He promises in particular: to preserve the research tax credit; to maintain the Dutreil pact; to continue the reduction of the CVAE; and above all to put an end to the incessant tax changes.

The former Prime Minister also cites the example of the reconstruction of Notre-Dame de Paris to advocate for a radical simplification of procedures.

Why, he essentially asks, could not what made it possible to rebuild the cathedral quickly be transposed to numerous industrial or real estate projects?

It also proposes to limit the possibilities of legal action against major projects.

Regarding housing, Gabriel Attal believes that the impossibility for many young people to become homeowners is now one of the main symptoms of downward mobility.

He wants in particular to simplify building regulations, give more power to mayors and promote homeownership for tenants in social housing.

Raphaël Glucksmann is trying to reconcile the left and employers

Raphaël Glucksmann defended a very different line: that of a social democracy embracing the market economy but rejecting excessive concentration of wealth.

His project is based in particular on one idea: to make inheritances more expensive in order to reduce taxes on labor.

He therefore proposes to reduce the CSG (General Social Contribution) for employees while increasing the taxation of very large transfers of assets.

The candidate insists, however, that his plan would not cover "99% of inheritances".

Its stated objective is to prevent the emergence of a "heritocracy" , in other words, a society in which inherited wealth counts more than work.

Glucksmann also promises a stable tax trajectory for businesses.

"We're not going to create a new tax every day," he assures.

He also refuses to completely abandon the Dutreil pact.

But its real economic priority lies elsewhere: European reindustrialization.

Glucksmann believes that Europe must abandon the idea of ​​free trade without protection.

He promises that, if he wins the presidency, he will go and "bang his fist on the table" in Brussels.

He wants in particular to use the approximately 2 trillion euros of European public procurement to further promote production on the continent.

The candidate believes that globalization as it has functioned for several decades is over.

"The illusion of the global village, where Europe is the butt of the joke, is over," he declared.

He also acknowledges wanting to become the president of an "ecological revolution" , considering that climate investments are not a burden but insurance against future, much more costly crises.

Finally, Glucksmann promises to repeal the 2023 pension reform but remains much less precise on the system that would replace it, apart from an increased consideration of arduousness.

Mélenchon facing off against employers: no attempt at softening the blow.

Jean-Luc Mélenchon, for his part, did not come to the Medef to change his speech in order to appeal to the room.

He opened hostilities by directly inviting employers to increase wages.

According to him, the combination of the government budget and inflation could cause a recession if wages do not increase.

The LFI candidate points out that consumption represents a crucial part of the French economy and believes that a weakening of purchasing power would inevitably end up hitting businesses themselves.

On pensions, his position is unambiguous: repeal of the reform and objective of returning "as quickly as possible" to 60 years old.

He also rejects capitalization, arguing that it would require much higher contributions to achieve a return comparable to distribution.

But the most explosive proposal concerns the debt held by European institutions.

Mélenchon advocates for the cancellation of a portion of the public debt held by the European Central Bank.

Faced with criticism from Édouard Philippe, who accuses him of wanting to lead France towards a form of "banking ban", the LFI candidate asserts that it would be a negotiation conducted at the European level and not a French default decided unilaterally.

He is simultaneously pursuing a European policy of confrontation.

"Anything that comes from Europe that contradicts the interests of the French, we will disobey," he warns.

On corporate taxation, Mélenchon also wants to make a strong distinction between reinvested profits and those distributed to shareholders.

He specifically mentions the return of a tax of up to 50% on the portion distributed as dividends.

However, he advocates an ambitious industrial policy: textiles, timber industry, marine energy, quantum technologies, artificial intelligence and even spaceplanes.

To support this reindustrialization, it proposes a vocational training program ranging from CAP to professional degree.

In other words, contrary to some caricatures, the Mélenchon line is not only redistributive: it also relies on an industrial policy directed and planned by the State.

But the means used are the antithesis of those proposed by the right: more planning, differentiated taxation, public spending and confrontation with certain European rules.

Marine Tondelier advocates for a much more redistributive economy.

Marine Tondelier defended the other pole of the left.

She too promises to repeal the pension reform.

But his most spectacular economic proposal is the introduction of a minimum wage of 2,000 euros gross.

Aware of the potential impact of this increase on small businesses, the Green candidate simultaneously promises a major support program for micro-enterprises and SMEs.

This could include: tax reductions; long-term zero-interest loans to finance the transition; aid for the electrification of heavy vehicles; and various compensations for small businesses.

Tondelier thus promises a "presidency of SMEs".

At the same time, it wants to reduce the effective tax gap between small and large companies.

According to her, SMEs bear a proportionally higher tax burden relative to their net operating surplus than large groups.

Regarding the Dutreil pact, the Green candidate does not want to abolish it but wishes to refocus it exclusively on genuine family inheritance rather than on what she considers to be tax optimization mechanisms.

She also advocates administrative simplification, but insists on distinguishing it from deregulation.

His rule is simple:

The administration should never ask a company for information that the state already possesses.

On energy, Tondelier advocates a massive acceleration of the development of renewables and accuses Bruno Retailleau of advocating a policy of industrial "degrowth" by opposing it.

Pensions: probably the clearest divide in the debate

Beyond individual proposals, the debate helped to outline several very clear camps.

The differences on pensions are dramatic.

Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Marine Tondelier want to revisit the reform and reduce the retirement age.

Raphaël Glucksmann also wants to repeal the 2023 reform but is considering a new reform based in particular on arduousness.

Conversely, Édouard Philippe believes that the French will have to work longer.

Bruno Retailleau wants to automatically link the retirement age to life expectancy.

Gabriel Attal proposes a deeper overhaul of the system with more freedom and a capitalization component.

Marine Le Pen was much less focused on this issue during this part of the debate, focusing instead on debt, businesses, energy and standards.

The next presidential election could therefore once again become a true referendum on the French social model.

Debt: three irreconcilable philosophies

The second major divide: public finances.

Marine Le Pen wants to showcase a spectacular savings plan of 125 billion euros.

Édouard Philippe and Bruno Retailleau want to drastically reduce spending, particularly social spending.

Gabriel Attal is now also clearly in the camp of reducing social spending.

Raphaël Glucksmann advocates for more investment but wants to finance certain tax cuts through a targeted increase in wealth taxation.

Marine Tondelier favours ecological investments and redistribution.

Jean-Luc Mélenchon, for his part, is questioning even the principle of repaying certain debts held by the ECB.

This confrontation could become one of the major ideological battles of 2027: should public spending be massively reduced or should the state be used to revive the economy and investment?

On the other hand, almost everyone agrees on reindustrialization.

This is probably the main point of consensus in the debate.

From Mélenchon to Retailleau, from Glucksmann to Le Pen, virtually all candidates now consider the return of industrial production to be a strategic priority.

The debate no longer truly pits supporters against opponents of reindustrialization.

It concerns the method.

Marine Le Pen is banking on national public procurement, lower production taxes and the elimination of standards.

Bruno Retailleau favours deregulation and lowering labor costs.

Édouard Philippe proposes a spectacular exchange between the elimination of production taxes and the elimination of subsidies.

Gabriel Attal is banking on innovation, simplification and fiscal stability.

Raphaël Glucksmann wants to use Europe's commercial and financial power to protect continental industry.

Jean-Luc Mélenchon supports a genuine industrial policy led by the State.

Marine Tondelier wants to make the ecological transition the driving force behind the new industrialization.

Industrial sovereignty has therefore become one of the few truly transpartisan objectives.

Europe is more divisive than the economy itself.

The debate also showed that another major confrontation is brewing around the European Union.

Mélenchon explicitly promises to disobey certain European directives when he judges them to be contrary to French interests.

Marine Le Pen criticizes European standards and especially their over-implementation by the French administration.

Raphaël Glucksmann, on the other hand, does not question the European scale: he wants to use Brussels as an instrument of economic power.

His plan is less about breaking free from Europe than about transforming the Union into a protectionist power capable of defending its companies against the United States and especially China.

The disagreements now focus less on globalization itself, whose limits are practically universally acknowledged, than on the level at which economic sovereignty should be rebuilt: France or Europe.

Work emerges as the major theme of 2027

Finally, almost all the candidates talked about work. But again, their answers were radically different.

Retailleau wants to work more. Philippe wants to extend working hours. Attal wants to increase net pay by reducing taxes. Le Pen wants to reduce workers' mandatory expenses. Glucksmann wants to shift some of the tax burden from labor to very large inheritances. Tondelier wants to directly increase the minimum wage. Mélenchon wants to push companies to massively increase salaries.

This could be one of the keys to the campaign: should France work more, pay more for work, or redistribute the wealth produced differently?

The first real draft of the 2027 presidential election

This debate obviously did not produce comprehensive economic programs. Several announced amounts still need to be documented and compared with their actual funding.

But politically, the evening was instructive.

Bruno Retailleau seeks to occupy the ground of the liberal and conservative break.

Édouard Philippe, that of managerial credibility and spending reduction.

Gabriel Attal is attempting to extend Macron's supply-side policy while acknowledging its failures and promising a deeper break.

Marine Le Pen wants to demonstrate that the RN can now simultaneously embody sovereignty, budgetary rigor and a pro-business policy.

Raphaël Glucksmann is building a protectionist, European and ecological social democracy.

Marine Tondelier supports a more redistributive economy and an acceleration of the environmental transition.

Jean-Luc Mélenchon , finally, remains faithful to his project of breaking with current budgetary and economic rules, based on planning, wage increases and massive state intervention.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect lies elsewhere: the seven candidates are now talking about sovereignty, industry, work and economic protection.

At Roland-Garros on Thursday, August 27, the 2027 presidential election saw its first real major economic debate. And behind the technical discussions on standards, taxes, and social security contributions, the much more fundamental choice that will be put to the voters was already taking shape: what economic and social model does France still want to be able to finance, and what effort is it prepared to make to preserve or transform it?