Ladies and gentlemen, it's Bernard Arnault who is sparking debate today. LVMH's 2025 revenue and profits are lower than one might have imagined, lower than in previous years. And so Bernard Arnault is justifying this. Hello Magalie Lunel, welcome back. Let's listen to Bernard Arnault right away. Why not? Well, there you have it, Bernard Arnault explaining to his shareholders the reasons why things aren't as flourishing as one might have imagined.
This year, with the continuation of geopolitical crises, with economic uncertainty, with the policies of certain states, including our own, which are rather anti-business, taxing them to the maximum and thus creating unemployment, I think there is reason to be a bit reserved.
There you have it, there is reason to be a bit reserved. So the crisis, geopolitics, unemployment, and France's tax obsessions. We are with Bernardo, which means he is very angry.
Yes, it means he is very... what? Very reserved, in the subtitles, it's all over the place.
Yeah. Yeah. You're decoding Bernard Arnault, you speak Bernard Arnault.
He's not someone who is trivial.
We are with Arthur Delaporte, the deputy for Calvados and spokesperson for the Socialist Party. It would be interesting to hear him because everyone says, 'Well yes, it's the socialist budget of France. It's the socialist budget of France that ensures companies are taxed more.' So we'll listen to him in a moment. Let's look at the figures, shall we? Because what he published yesterday, he spoke to shareholders to present his group's annual results. He did exactly the same thing in previous years. Let's listen to him from last year, since you were talking about anger, it was a cold anger last year. It was a bit more virulent than this. And so this year, his group, LVMH, has a net profit down 13% compared to last year. That makes a net profit of nearly 11 billion euros. But we'll see that before the tax on large companies that Bernard Arnault denounces, the results were even worse. We can discuss that in a moment.
So Lionel Rock, you are an entrepreneur, president and founder of Franco European, and you published 'Laissez-nous bosser' at the Observatoire. What does a French business leader think of what another French business leader, the biggest one, Bernard Arnault, just said?
Well, I think several things. As usual, when Bernard Arnault says something, it's a scandal and all of France, especially the political class... I don't see why Bernard Arnault wouldn't have the right to say that the budget, for the second time, is a scandal because it torpedoes the country's driving forces, it torpedoes businesses. Just the surtax that was supposed to not be renewed. They had promised us the surtax on large companies was obviously renewed, and on top of that, they had promised us SMEs that they would abolish the CVAE, and they didn't abolish it. So when Bernard Arnault says we have a government that is rather anti-business, I think he is being very, very kind. It's not rather anti-business, it's completely anti-business. Now, everyone should be aware that LVMH will make less profit. So it's prodigious. That means our country will be perfectly happy, will function perfectly, because I understood the problem in our country was that companies made profits. Well, there's good news, they're making 13% less profit. So obviously, nurses will be better paid, teachers will be better paid, because Bernard Arnault is going to get poorer. It's fabulous. Everyone seems surprised that LVMH is making less profit. We should just know that our billionaires, unfortunately, are very concentrated in luxury. And luxury, by definition, is luxury. And that means when the world enters a crisis, when some want to invade Greenland, the other... that's the fault of the French state. Of course. That's the same. It's the fault of the socialist deputies and the French state. Greenland, Venezuela, the end of the world. The absolute fault of the French state is not understanding that it's companies that create wealth and that obviously, you don't make a budget thinking, 'Let's first massacre the companies' out of pure demagoguery. So that's an absolute mistake. The second mistake is forgetting that we are dependent on luxury. Why are we dependent on luxury? Is it because our social model costs mean we can only sell... have employees in France when you sell bags for 3,000 euros? So yes, the budget as it is, is an absolute mistake. And the second mistake is thinking you can have a left or right-wing policy by making companies pay.
Arthur Delaporte, it will be interesting to have your reaction to what has just been said on the panel with this business leader who is visibly quite angry. First, on what Bernard Arnault said, do you agree that France doesn't like businesses?
No, but it's obvious. Bernard Arnault is once again being outrageous. I mean, he forgot to mention that he still received 3 billion euros in dividends last year. So I mean, he's someone who didn't pay, or hardly paid, income tax, which is false. We hear that every time, at some point we have to stop.
So, let Arthur Delaporte speak. Let Arthur Delaporte speak and we'll debate after.
I listened to you politely, I think, and I was... fortunately, I spend my time listening to politicians, so listen to entrepreneurs from time to time. You just cut me off twice in a row. So there, I'm just going to tell you that Bernard Arnault, and there was a study released two weeks ago, billionaires hardly pay any income tax, and it was Eric Lombard himself who said it, according to the figures he has from Bercy. So there is a real issue of the highest incomes contributing to tax.
The problem here is that two things are being mixed. Bernard's personal income, which is hardly taxed because he puts the bulk... let's talk about companies.
Exactly. And next to that, Bernard's personal income, which is obviously linked to LVMH's income, but next to that, LVMH's income. And what you just said, it's for the...
We'll get back to Arthur Delaporte. Yes. Why were you angry when he said that LVMH didn't pay taxes, that Bernard didn't pay individual income tax, proportionally paying less tax than most French people?
It's the result of journalistic and economic studies and surveys. And so it's not because France Télévision makes scandalous documentaries and... No, no, it's false. I'm just explaining to you why it's false. It means Bernard Arnault pays taxes exactly like everyone else on the sums he pays himself. So the only thing is that when you have a company, I have a company, if you will, that makes profits, I pay taxes on what I pay myself in dividends. So the problem is just there. So Mr. Zucman invented something brilliant.
Much less tax, though, because it was income. No, but it's true, I mean, there is one thing today which is that, effectively, there are people who can afford tax optimization and they allow themselves it. No, but I'm not saying you don't have the right to do it. It was built for you to do it. Now, the idiot of the day is the senior executive who pays his income tax. Well, there you go. Well, long live the senior executives. Wonderful. We can applaud them this noon.
When Bernard Arnault pays himself 300 million, he pays 100 million in taxes on the dividends, on the income. And by the way, what did Mr. Lombard do, which was prodigious? He started by saying, 'Ah, the rich don't pay income tax,' and then he started to say, 'No, actually, on capital.' Yes, indeed, Bernard Arnault doesn't pay tax on a fictitious sum of 150 billion, he doesn't pay tax on that. This story is crazy, it means if you don't distribute, you don't pay. And I would really like someone to explain to me how you could pay tax on sums you don't distribute.
Wait, I'm saying this for those listening, to be clear, the debate is there. Indeed, a billionaire or a business leader is only taxed on his income. And what Zucman wanted was for him to be taxed on his income and also on his overall wealth. But let's not go back to Zucman. Let's not go back to Zucman. It's the debate. Let's not go back because we lost Delaporte. No, no, he's here. But I would like to ask a question, I would like to put a question to the debate, including to the socialist representative here. It's that when Bernard Arnault says that indeed the tax system in France is anti-business, and here Arthur Delaporte, we are unfiltered, we are without hypocrisy, and it's not you who is being accused because the budget this year is a budget that is not for value creation and wealth creation, but for redistribution. That's how it's been in France for 75 years. It's not a budget aimed at youth and the future. It's a budget of rent for retirees, even the wealthiest retirees. I point out to you, Arthur Delaporte, that you are on the left. You refused through your votes that the wealthiest retirees make a contribution, notably for the youth. Thirdly, are you in favor of abolishing the production tax? That's what Bernard Arnault is attacking. It means before you even have 1 euro of profit in France, you pay taxes solely on your activity, even if you are in deficit. Do you find that normal?
Well, I will answer you on the first point. Is this a budget that favors retirees? You'll tell that to the young people we managed to protect with their 'not 1 euro' and to the apprentices who won't be taxed on their search. On the second question you ask, are we a paradise for billionaires? Well, the answer is obviously a bit, because you can see that there are optimization mechanisms in France that are superior to what would be in other countries. If Bernard Arnault moves to the United States tomorrow, he would pay 1 billion euros in tax on the 3 billion in dividends he received. Today, in France, we have... it's what the study I mentioned earlier from the Institute for Public Policy shows. Today, we have in France indeed protection mechanisms that are very strong. And so that's why we have asked, notably, to strengthen the tax on holdings to prevent the ultra-rich from putting patrimonial assets in holdings. You will look at who owns Mr. Arnault's yacht, who owns his properties, and it is indeed means to circumvent taxation that are extremely well known. And in fact, we are diverting ourselves from what is ultimately the main imposture of Bernard Arnault's speech, which is that he confuses LVMH, the company, taxation in France, and the idea that it would be because of that that its profits are down 13%. And you started to say it earlier, sir, what makes LVMH's profits down is first a global context. We are on a multinational company. So there are both uncertainties linked to American policy, there is the slowdown in growth in China which means the ultra-rich and the middle classes will consume less LVMH products. And so, there is also an impact from global balances and that's what means there is less growth for the company, less profit, and more fixed costs linked to maintaining the productive apparatus. So we must stop saying it's because of France that LVMH is down, and I think it's rather the fault of Donald Trump and also conflicts with China. So there, we must put things in proportion and say that Bernard Arnault, yes, gets rich thanks to being multinational and thanks to the door. There, what you're saying is true.
By the way, we'll see that in a moment with Nivine Potros. We'll see the real reasons, the multiple reasons for the drop in LVMH's profits this year. But it's true what Lionel Rock was saying, we have a budget that isn't very agile. We are all a bit clueless about economics. I mean us collectively, the 70 million French people, and we immediately think of redistribution before thinking of enrichment. If there is no enrichment, there is no redistribution. The result is we are serving retirees today, we are trying to be a bit more socially just. But we forget one thing, which is that to be more socially just, we must create a magic shield for companies to prosper, for them to be happy, for them to attract more and more, and we are not there. And so Bernard Arnault is a bit right there. We are quite harsh in our discourse, quite ideological with business leaders, always ready to designate Bernard Arnault as a black sheep. Bernard Arnault is a business leader. And then behind, we always think about... we don't say 'raise taxes,' we say 'go take their money.' You see, it's like we'll talk about it later, François Ruffin who said the head of state, the president of the Republic, he must be on the minimum wage. There is always this kind of vengeful idea, but as a result of being so ideological, we are no longer very agile, and companies, well, they are not happy, and Bernard Arnault is a bit the one who speaks for everyone. And it would be really great if you in the Socialist Party were a bit more pro-business. It's not renouncing socialism to be pro-business. Léon Blum was pro-business. There are magnificent texts by Jean Jaurès on the market economy that would make any liberal today not dare to pronounce. Jean Jaurès who lived in the 16th arrondissement of Paris said them. So why aren't you a bit more pro-business?
But they are, after 2 years.
