The booklet A rate does not only make people happy. Fixed, since August 1, at 3% until 2025, the remuneration of the preferred savings product of the French is disputed by some, who hoped to see it increase further with inflation. An appeal was even filed with the Council of State on the day this measure came into force.
On Twitter, at the beginning of August, the professor of public law at the University of Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, Paul Cassia, indicated that he had contacted the institution in order to verify two elements: first, if ““exceptional circumstances” allow not to raise this rate to 4.1%”; then, if “this rate can be frozen for 18 months”. Two points on which the member of the Anticor Board of Directors expresses doubts.
The rate of booklet A varies above all according to “calculation rules”, which should have taken it to 4.1%, recalled the professor. The concerns of the Banque de France, for which a “too high rate […] would be detrimental to our economic activity and our growth”, do not constitute “exceptional circumstances”, argued the lawyer, on BFM Business, this week. The decision of the authorities, and their explanation according to which a significant rate would weigh on the financing of social housing “is tantamount to setting a ceiling on the rate of the booklet A, and the regulations” do not provide for it, he estimated. In addition, the exceptional would be “unpredictable, irresistible”, qualifiers which do not apply to the current situation, pleaded Paul Cassia, for whom “the rate of the booklet A must follow the planned mathematical formula”. Finally, if, in the longer term, the rate will remain fixed at 3% until 2025, “nobody can determine whether inflation will go down or not”, and if the remuneration could then exceed the rise in prices.
In mid-July, the Minister of Economy and Finance announced that he was following the recommendations of the Banque de France, maintaining the rate for the Livret A at 3% until 2025. And this, despite a formula that could have bring it to 4.1% if it had been applied automatically. This would have increased “the cost of credit for SMEs, which need to invest” as well as that of “credit for social housing”, argued Bruno Le Maire. “The higher the passbook A rate, the more expensive the loans. I do not want to jeopardize the construction of tens of thousands of homes or the development of thousands of small businesses,” added the boss of Bercy. For its part, the institution headed by François Villeroy de Galhau considered that maintaining the lower rate was also justified by the anticipated drop in inflation.
It remains to be seen what the decision of the Council of State will be: it issues its opinions “within eleven months”, on average, noted Paul Cassia. The verdict is therefore not expected immediately. In the event of cancellation of Bercy’s decision, it could be “compensated” for savers, with “retroactive effect”: “the new rate should apply from August 1, 2023”, or not, depending on the choice of the judge, concluded the professor. Enough to potentially earn the main concerned a few precious euros in remuneration … and trigger a big headache to calculate the sums to be paid to each.