With the public deficit preparing to break the 6% ceiling, the government is seeking to replenish the coffers in its 2025 budget. Elimination of 4,000 teaching positions, tax on electricity, tax on large fortunes, increase in the price of mutual insurance, etc. Other ideas? Yes ! Even if it means constantly using Germany as an economic model during the 2010 decade, there is indeed a tax that could inspire Michel Barnier among our neighbors across the Rhine. Tax dog owners.
If you have a corgi, a dachshund or a German shepherd on the other side of the Moselle, you must indeed check out. Count on average 120 euros to have a dog in Berlin and 102 euros in Frankfurt, reports Les Echos in an article. The doggie is taxable from three months and the price varies depending on the breed: count on more than 1,000 euros per year in Nuremberg if you have a fighting dog. The measure is an economic success: 421 million euros reported in 2023, i.e. revenue up 40% in ten years.
A billion euros in revenue and a few arguments
Could such a tax exist in France? 9,712,324 dogs were identified in 2023 according to the national identification file for dogs, cats and ferrets. At an average annual dog tax of 100 euros, that’s almost a billion found (you can stop cutting teaching positions, thank you).
In principle, the idea would not be aberrant either. “The owner of the dog does not pay all of the costs,” rationalizes François Lévêque, professor of economics at Mines Paris Tech and who has studied the economy around the canine. Not only does the municipality pay for certain facilities, such as dog parks or even free dog waste bag dispensers in certain towns like Clamart or Rennes. But these famous droppings also have a cost. “Of course, more and more teachers collect and throw away, but not only are there still some who do not do it, but even the treatment of this non-transformable waste has a price,” explains the teacher, also citing other unfortunate consequences of our animal friends on expenses, in particular possible bites.
What meaning do we give to public space?
Clément Carbonnier, co-director of the socio-fiscal policies research axis of the Interdisciplinary Laboratory for the Evaluation of Public Policies at Sciences Po, however procrastinates: “If dog owners have to pay for the entire dog park, that bike commuters pay for cycle paths, or only parents for children’s play parks, we lose the sense of public space. » For the economist, local public finances and municipal taxes must be used for… public services, even if not everyone uses them. “Otherwise, we get “local clubs”: everyone pays their share and has their own space. »
Germany, however, has another argument for this tax dating back several centuries. At the time, Prussia considered that anyone who had enough money to pay for a ball of hair still had two or three cents more to give to the nation-state. And in fact, at 1,000 euros the cost of maintaining a dog on average in France, we could say that owners can afford a small additional tax.
Tax the rich, not the dog owners
Audrey Jougla, professor of philosophy and specialist in the relationship between man and animal, denies the idea: “Not all dog owners are well off, nor do they have the means to treat their animals well. Many dogs belong to a disadvantaged urban population. »
Another complaint, “if we want to tax the rich more, there is a wonderful tool: income tax,” smiles Clément Carbonnier. And in a non-sarcastic version: “Taxing more the owners of so-called luxury products quickly shows the limits for better redistribution. » First complaint, if there is a correlation between the level of wealth and the consumption of certain goods, “the latter is never perfect and always contains exceptions”. Then, “the interest of taxes is the opposite method: to be very uniform, not fair but to bring in a lot. For the progressive side, it is better to tax income and assets. »
A measure far too unpopular to see the light of day
But there is no point in debating the merits or otherwise of this measure any longer, as the latter actually has no chance of emerging from the 2025 budget. The strong argument? Its immense unpopularity. Audrey Jougla: “Today, the pet, and particularly the dog and the cat, is experienced as a full member of the family. There is a somewhat excessive ratio in the space it can occupy, not necessarily healthy for the animal either. But the latter seems difficult to touch politically. »
In France, 32% of households owned a dog in 2023. It is therefore difficult to imagine the government embarking on a measure perhaps even more criticized than pension reform. “Dog owners would be very angry, and the French without dogs would not even be happy or relieved about this tax. This would not be a good political calculation. » On the contrary, “many MPs are proposing amendments to subsidize pet owners, particularly with inflation”, underlines the professor. The country is therefore very far from a tax on doggies, their owners can breathe a (w)ouf of relief.
