Stories du Moment

Taxing the (ultra)rich, museum comings and goings, the beauty of Greater Paris, and a new "overheard in"

Sep 22, 2025

Though the news out of France has felt eclipsed by the Trump regime’s swift and violent rollout of Project 2025, it’s worth keeping tabs. After all, the future of Europe hangs in the balance! Let’s start with the obvious topic:

FISCAL FITNESS

Remember in the last edition of this series when I talked about Bayrou and his austerity measures to resolve the budget and debt crisis? Two weeks ago, those measures brought him down and left the government scrambling for stability.

He was forced to resign after his confidence motion failed in the National Assembly. As predicted, no party would fully support his 2026 budget plan.

Macron named Sébastien Lecornu to take his place as the new Prime Minister — an ex-defense minister and reserve colonel in the Gendarmerie who is homophobic, loves hunting, has entertained dialogue with the far right, and looks like he’s been scorned by many a lady (the guy is 39, tell me how). The administration has to get back to budget business for 2026 and negotiate amid a deeply fragmented parliament. The Socialists are pushing hard for concessions: reversing some pension reform, reinstating a wealth tax, and curbing austerity.

One common-sense proposal to help plug the debt gap is a 2% wealth tax on fortunes above €100 million, championed by the brilliant economist Gabriel Zucman, a researcher and professor at the Paris School of Economics and UC Berkeley and the Director of the EU tax observatory in Paris. In practical terms, this would impact 1,800 people—the 500 biggest fortunes in the country.

It’s not only a crucial method for wealth redistribution but a fiscal necessity that could potentially bring in up to €20-22 billion annually. Zucman’s doctoral mentor, Thomas Piketty, agreed with the measure but said that it doesn’t go far enough. In a recent interview, he said:

If we take the 500 largest fortunes listed by Challenges magazine, in 2010 they were collectively worth around €200 billion. Today, they collectively weigh in at €1.2 trillion. They have multiplied their wealth sixfold. Everyone knows that France's gross domestic product, average salary, and average wealth have not multiplied sixfold.
The proposal for a minimum wealth tax, known as the Zucman tax, is really the bare minimum. We are simply proposing to tax the 1,800 taxpayers who have more than €100 million in assets, which roughly corresponds to the 500 families with the 500 largest fortunes, at 2% per year.
According to data from Challenges, these fortunes have grown by an average of 7 to 8% per year over the last 15 years. The Zucman tax is really a minimum because, at 2% per year, it would take a century just to return to the starting point of 2010, which was not a state of poverty for these people. There is really a question of minimum tax justice.

Despite overwhelming support from the French population, the tax was rejected by the Senate in June 2025. With a new government, it’s all up for debate once again. And because of that, the country’s biggest fortunes are grumbling. LVMH’s Bernard Arnaud called Zucman “a radical leftist” whose measure would spur a billionaire exodus (again, little evidence to support this would happen), stifle innovation, and destroy the economy.

Even Arthur Mensch, CEO and co-founder of Mistral AI, France’s biggest AI start-up, recently valued at over $14 billion, agrees that greater tax fairness is needed. In his case, and on paper, his wealth lands him in that $100 million contingent, but it’s wrapped up in Mistral. In other words: very little liquidity to pay a tax in any traditional way.

But as Piketty insists, there’s a solution to that specific situation, just as there are solutions to every excuse critics make about an ultra-wealth tax.

“Those who lecture us about not taxing billionaires have no problem with taxing the middle and working classes with property tax. This tax is extremely unfair. If you have purchased a property worth €200,000 but are €190,000 in debt, you effectively own nothing. Your repayments are equivalent to rent. Yet you pay the same property tax as someone with the same property who has no debt and €3 million in financial assets.
Is this normal? This system was put in place during the French Revolution, when financial assets were not as important as they are today. It has never been updated, and politicians see no problem with this.”

RELATED READING

Is France at risk of being Europe’s new sick man? (BBC)
Rome gloats as Italy Becomes France and France Becomes Italy (Politico)
Le Pen-proofing Europe (Politico)
Macron has a historic choice to make for France and Europe (Carnegie Europe)

THE MUSEUM SHUFFLE

The Grand Palais’s Beaux Arts nave has been restored, down to its green riveted beams. Charly Broyez for Chatillon Architectes.

For Robb Report, I wrote about the cost of keeping Paris at the top of the cultural ladder. It was during my walk-through of the fully reopened Grand Palais and speaking with the project’s architect, François Chatillon, that the idea crystallized. (You'll see why when you read some of his thoughts in the piece—a journalist’s dream source!)

Two factors are at play here: the age and building composition of these institutions and the city’s mushrooming tourism. I spoke to Susan Taylor Leduc, art historian, licensed guide, and founder of Picturesque Voyages, about these tensions and wanted to share some of her thoughts that didn’t make the final version of the piece:

On how mass tourism reshaping the role of Paris’s major museums

There’s an adage in Paris: Parisians hate tourists but need the revenue. I think the adage is outdated—especially after the 2024 Olympics—but it reflects an antiquated belief that tourism detracts from Parisians’ daily lives. In fact, tourism today is critical to the French economy—and many locals depend on the tourist industry. Given the acceleration of global travel and the influence of social media, the question becomes how stakeholders should allocate the benefits of tourism so that travelers and locals alike can enjoy high-quality experiences. Museums, dependent on ticket sales, are on the front lines of this issue; they are constantly adapting to increased visitor flows through programming and timed ticketing, as they attempt to balance their mission to preserve their collections and educate diverse audiences.

The Louvre has nearly 9 million annual visitors. From your perspective, is there a breaking point where these institutions simply can’t deliver on the promise of the experience?

The central issue at the Louvre is that its “greatest hits” of masterpieces are concentrated in a single wing. As a result, the majority of visitors follow a prescribed path. This route is already over-touristed and no longer sustainable: most visitors leave disappointed, exhausted, and unwilling to return.
By contrast, other wings of the museum, which showcase lesser-known works, offer opportunities for in-depth contemplation of exceptional objects and guided discussions, often led by certified experts. The success of the recent Louvre Couture exhibition, for example, drew hundreds of visitors to an under-visited area—the decorative arts wing—creating new viewing experiences and shifting the flow of people and attention.
Another way to frame the issue is to ask: how do we understand the Louvre as a tourist attraction? Is it a destination because it offers a “bucket list” of works to see once in a lifetime? If so, how can the museum balance the revenue generated by those must-see works with the desire to encourage new and more diverse experiences? Scholars, curators, and artists have grappled with these questions for decades. At the Louvre, the challenge is magnified by its storied history, its vast collections, and its location at the very heart of Paris—an unavoidable stop on the global tourist circuit—but with the upcoming plan to accommodate 13 million visitors they now have an opportunity to rethink how to reconcile global tourism with visitor experiences that encourage contemplation, inquiry, and learning.

Should Paris be willing to do whatever it takes to deliver world-class cultural experiences? If so, would that add unmanageable pressure on institutions like the Louvre?

Yes, I agree there is an audience for “authentic experiences”. The real question is who decides what that experience should be? To me, world-class experience should translate into a range of options for all types of visitors and budgets, while still allowing everyone the time to pause, learn, and enjoy.
Take Versailles, for example: the general tour of the State Apartments is scripted and oversaturated. The Hall of Mirrors has essentially become the Hall of Instagram—it’s extremely crowded. That being said, Versailles provides a range of visitor options at different price points. I believe there should be a more concerted effort to improve the current system for the general public, perhaps by prioritizing dedicated times for school groups, so that tourists and children—who have very different needs—do not overlap, but the direction, and notably their in-house tourist office, does try to provide a range of options for different audiences. Certified guides become the cultural mediators at Versailles, critical to navigating the crowds and finding the right experience for their clients.

AN ODE TO GREATER PARIS

Forgive me for eye-rolling a bit, as this NYT piece comes yearssssss after many of us have written about the changes in Greater Paris (see also: my first two books) but still, it’s good to see this topic getting more attention.

BONUS

Since free speech is very front of mind at the moment, I wanted to share this brilliant episode on The Grey Area, featuring historian Fara Dabhoiwala, author of What Is Free Speech? The conversation explores why speech is never just “speech,” how context and power shape who gets heard, the dangers of harmful speech, and the challenges of regulating platforms in a global media environment.

OVERHEARD IN:

“I will not tolerate any Taylor slander. I told my boss I couldn’t come in, it was a national holiday for me.”— A young millennial with a friend at 192 Books in New York.

“I never had kids. I told myself at 20 I would have one with every man I loved, but I only loved one man and never had any in the end. It’s what Laetitia Casta has done: have a kid with every partner. I quite like that, a kid as a record of your relationship. By the way, did you hear she’s single again?” — an 82-year-old Parisian widow over lunch.

Refer a friend

If you think a friend would enjoy The New Paris Dispatch, gift subscriptions are available here | Order copies of my books The New Paris, The New Parisienne, and The Eater Guide to Paris | Pick up a copy of my dining & coffee guide!

The New Paris Dispatch

Understanding Paris: the Périph

Discussion about this post