Question 11070 — intercommunality

Summary

Mr. Fabien Matras questions the Minister of Territorial Cohesion on the modalities of allocation of the National Fund for Equalization of Municipal and Intermunicipal Resources (FPIC), the calculation methods of which seem to penalize certain intermunicipalities. The operating methods of this National Fund for the equalization of municipal and intermunicipal resources (FPIC) were defined in the finance law for 2012, article of which 144 provided for its entry into force that same year, the various finance laws having made successive adjustments while retaining its structure. Listed in art. L. 2336-1 of the general code of local authorities (CGCT), this solidarity fund establishes a national system of horizontal equalization between contributing and beneficiary intermunicipal groups according to their wealth. The measure of this wealth is done in a consolidated manner by calculating their aggregate financial potential (PFIA) as well as their aggregate tax potential (PFA), the criteria of which are determined by article L. 2336-2 of the CGCT. Applied to an intermunicipal group, these criteria make it possible to neutralize the tax choices of EPCIs and to compare them with each other when they are of different forms. Under article L. 2336-3 of the CGCT, are considered contributors intermunicipal groups and municipalities not belonging to any group with their own taxation, whose PFIA per inhabitant is greater than 90% of the national average PFIA per inhabitant. The beneficiaries, then, concern 60% of the intercommunal groups classified according to decreasing function of a synthetic index of resources and expenses. This synthetic index is made up of 60% of per capita income, 20% of aggregate financial potential and 20% of the tax effort. However, certain elements of calculation applied to contributors and beneficiaries have perverse effects, in particular those applied to the PFIA per capita or the taking into account of the aggregate tax effort. It has long been demonstrated the unfair nature of this method of calculation, which, although it makes it possible to take into account the increase in the workload of certain intercommunal groups due to the increase in their population, in outrageously disadvantages others. Indeed, certain rural intercommunal groups, less densely populated and whose economic and professional fabric is weak, find themselves exclusively contributing to the benefit of intermunicipal groups in urban areas. In other words, this reverses the logic of this fund by taking resources from certain less advantaged intercommunal groups to transfer them to others, more advantaged. Thus, he would like to know if the Government intends to take up this subject, eagerly awaited in rural areas, and what the latter intends to do to erase the inequalities inherent in the intercommunal equalization fund.

Machine translation from French. The official text remains authoritative.

Timeline

No timeline events have been ingested for this record yet.

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

No documents linked.

Sponsors

No sponsors or actors listed by the source.

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.