And we are back with a great figure of French business, Pierre Gattaz. Good evening.
Thank you very much for being with us. You are the former boss of bosses. You were at the head of MEDEF from 2013 to 2018. So it was you who participated with François Hollande in the creation of this famous CICE. We saw it earlier, you were wearing at the time this little pin promising the creation of one million jobs. 12 years later, what do you acknowledge? Some mistakes, a failure, a fiasco?
A pride. We created 2.3 million jobs between 2014 and 2023. This pin of one million jobs is a yellow book from MEDEF that I made with my federations, the territories, which consisted of having a cocktail of measures to restore a competitive France. So on taxation, tax cuts, on the reduction of labor costs. The Hollande government, which I salute because there was courage behind all that, decided to do the CICE, decided to do the business laws to simplify the labor code. The CICE cost a lot and ultimately created very few jobs contrary to what was said at the time. For me, the million jobs was not about the CICE. The CICE was a measure to reduce labor costs. Moreover, I wanted to do it across the entire spectrum.
Yes. When you look at the figures from France Stratégie, the reference body that evaluated this public policy for Matignon, we see more than 100 billion euros over 6 years for this CICE and about 100,000 jobs. That's almost 1 million euros per job. That's a lot of money.
That's not the way to reason. First, it probably avoided massive job losses. It prevented... and it allowed... it's contained in the 100,000 jobs, it's the 100,000 creations and job maintenance. Dear sir, we created 2.3 million jobs thanks to the CICE on the one hand, to the flat tax at 30%, to the simplification of the labor code. That's still remarkable and thanks to a socialist government that understood that supply-side policy was fundamental. That's how all countries succeed in the world. So if you want, I will not make the link between the CICE which created 100,000 jobs, we don't care. That's not the problem.
It was still the promise of the time, in any case.
But it's not the promise. My promise was to say we can create 1 million jobs in 5 years on condition that fiscal and social reforms are put in place. My thing was completely distorted. I will wear the pin with pride and I can tell you I will put two because 2.3 million jobs were created.
Is this CICE misused? Sometimes, you saw the example of Michelin which received 4 million euros from the French state to buy machines on sites that will eventually close. And we interviewed Richard Grangien who was laid off by Michelin, who knows that you are our guest tonight and who asks you this question.
Pierre Gattaz, well I would like to know exactly his economic model, how long it will last? How long will it be able to continue to fatten shareholders at the expense of workers? Because Michelin when it receives 130 million in subsidies on top of that, well it pays 1.5 billion to its shareholders. There, the money goes there. And here, we are in total correlation with what is happening in the country right now. People don't understand what the state did with its money. Well, the state gave it to Michelin, it gave it to companies like Michelin.
So, I will answer that first, I am very sad to see factories closed in France. It's been 40 years, it's my fight. At Radiall, I kept my four historic factories, I added a fifth in France and we export 90%. So we are not forced to relocate. We can have industry in France. So we can keep, I moved upmarket, I managed, I changed, etc. It's a tragedy to close a factory. It's a tragedy, it's a disaster. And then it's a choice, you are the example. If you yourself manage to keep your sites in France, Michelin which makes profits worldwide could keep some... I'll tell you something, it's that a group like Michelin may have 10, 15, 20 factories, 30 factories in France. Some are not doing well, this one, unfortunately you either manage to turn them around, it can happen, do everything to turn them around, or you are forced to make plans. The fact that Michelin received 4 million euros of CICE public aid to buy machines on sites that will eventually close, that's normal. My theory, I'll tell you, is that we should lower French taxation and keep your aid. We need more aid, we need more CICE, we need more C. You lower French taxation. You lower French taxation to the level of taxation of other European countries. There should be no more aid to businesses at all today. Yes, I don't want any more aid because look what it does. It creates terrible controversies. It means that civil servants will impose things on you, will control them, will monitor them, will ask you for accounts. It creates commissions in the Senate, lots of people, hundreds of people, thousands of people that we pay. So, you have the productive ones like us, I create value with my employees, my engineers, and we have lots of unproductive people that we call administrative, that we call the administration that comes to bother us all day. So, I disagree that the unproductive should be more numerous than the productive.
So Pierre Gattaz, figure of business, former boss of bosses, officially asks tonight for the end of aid to businesses.
That's my personal opinion, which I share with other bosses, but if you want, all the aid that we call aid are adjustments, but we still have... in the calculation you still have tax exemptions, there are also direct subsidies, there are many devices, more than 2,200 aid devices for businesses. You have to manage all that. Can you imagine the number of unproductive civil servants in the administration? That's why, moreover, these aids benefit very largely multinationals, large companies. We're not talking tonight about small SMEs, the local baker, small entrepreneurs. Lower taxation, put us on an equal footing, and you will see that the French, that French entrepreneurs, small, medium and large, will smash it and become world champions.
Michelin should repay the CICE that allowed it to buy some machines. That's what the commission of inquiry is asking. Why not?
I, this question bothers me because you receive subsidies at a given moment and you have a crisis that falls on you like Covid. A week later, you are in great peril. But Michelin is not in crisis, in fact it was in a tire crisis. The tire market is completely international. We play in an international arena. The country must be competitive and above all we must make our icons of the economy. See, we talk about Capgemini, we often talk about Bernard Arnault. They are icons of the economy. We are fighters of the globalized economy and we are with figures, you talk about LVMH with figures that are sometimes quite shocking for public opinion.
See, we talk about Capgemini, we often talk about Bernard Arnault. They are icons of the economy. We are fighters of the globalized economy and we are with figures, you talk about LVMH with figures that are sometimes quite shocking for public opinion. We see the giant of French luxury which in 2023 made 15.2 billion in profits worldwide and which received 275 million euros in aid. Do we need to give so much money to a company that is doing so well?
But there are aids that are possible and that can be recovered. People take them obviously, but that's what I'm telling you to avoid controversy, you lower taxation and that works very well. Then, we are not obliged to LVMH in the years when it's going very well. We have Patrick Pouyanné for example, CEO of Total, who is a rather liberal person, a great boss who explains that perhaps public aid should be reserved for companies that are in crisis. But okay. Why not? I think there should be no aid at all, but you lower taxation. That's my point of view.
Is it really only a problem of taxation? Let's take the example of STMicroelectronics which was also much commented on during the commission of inquiry, 487 million euros in public aid in 2023 and yet it is a company that paid in France less than 100,000 euros in taxes the same year. That means the French state collected less than 100,000 euros and gave aid to the tune of 487 million euros. In one case, we understand why.
You are in a very specific case of semiconductors which is a flagship of the future, a strategic sector of sovereignty. It's a Franco-Italian company, it's an industrial strategy of the state.
But do these figures shock you? Less than 100,000 euros in taxes collected by the state while at the same time giving almost 500 million euros in aid.
