Presidential election: Attal advocates for fiscal, social and environmental harmonization in Europe
In Reims, on September 17, 2026, Gabriel Attal proposed building a « United States of Europe » around a group of willing countries. Behind this concept, his speech detailed a harmonization of tax systems, labor laws, and environmental policies, as well as a president elected at the European level. The crucial question is not only what he wants to share: it is what the other states would agree to share, and according to what rules. ( doc.parti.re )
A more precise proposal than a slogan
Gabriel Attal, a presidential candidate, is not describing the creation of a single country. In the text of his speech published by his team, he advocates for « economic, technological, and ecological federalism » among willing states. He proposes, in particular, to harmonize tax rates, establish common labor laws, align regulations applicable to businesses, and create common resources as well as a Treasury capable of issuing debt. Ecological planning and financing for adaptation to climate change are also part of the plan. These are campaign proposals, not final decisions. ( doc.parti.re ) His approach has two phases. Attal first wants to convince a core group of European partners to negotiate a treaty; during these discussions, he intends to utilize the « enhanced cooperation » already provided for in the European Union treaties. He cites several countries to which he wishes to extend an olive branch, while acknowledging that they are not necessarily ready to follow him. This distinction is important: a list of potential partners is not a fully formed coalition. ( doc.parti.re )
The first obstacle: who decides on taxes?
The Council of the European Union points out that European tax rules are adopted unanimously by the Member States. It also specifies that the Union already harmonizes certain aspects of national legislation, particularly regarding VAT. Attal’s proposal, therefore, does not start from scratch. But converging the rates of all taxes and duties, as he suggests, would go far beyond a simple technical adjustment: it would be necessary to define which levies are concerned, at what level they should be aligned, and to obtain the necessary agreements. The speech sets a direction, but not yet these trade-offs. ( doc.parti.re ) The distinction is just as important in the social sphere. The Union coordinates the social security rights of people moving between countries, but this coordination does not replace national systems with a single regime. Similarly, the idea of a common labor law raises a question that the word « simplification » does not resolve: what protections would be maintained when national rules differ? Bringing rights closer together means choosing their content, not just removing forms. ( consilium.europa.eu )
The « hard core » is not a universal key
Attal presents enhanced cooperation as a way to move forward without waiting for the entire Union. The mechanism exists, but its application is more limited than the formula suggests: Article 20 of the Treaty on European Union requires the participation of at least nine Member States in areas where the Union does not have exclusive competence. Authorization is granted as a last resort, when the objectives cannot be achieved within a reasonable timeframe by the entire Union. A voluntary group can therefore act within this framework; it cannot, by its own volition, disregard the treaties. ( doc.parti.re ) The candidate also proposes that the future entity have a parliament composed of Members of the European Parliament from the participating countries and a president elected by universal suffrage across Europe. This is not the current method of appointing the President of the European Commission: its holder is nominated by the European Council and then elected by the European Parliament. The proposed new architecture proposed in Reims would therefore require a precise legal definition of powers, the electorate, and the relationship with existing institutions. If it entailed a revision of the Union treaties, this revision would have to be ratified by all member states according to their constitutional procedures. ( doc.parti.re )
A new political development, not an idea that originated in Reims.
Taken literally, the phrase doesn’t stand up well to historical scrutiny. Victor Hugo, who was a member of parliament, already spoke of the « United States of Europe » in 1849; in 2002, Minister Pierre Moscovici also used this expression to talk about the future of the Union. This doesn’t make their projects identical to the one presented in Reims. It simply deprives the candidate of the right to invent the phrase. ( doc.parti.re )
Key takeaways
Established: The speech of September 17th proposes deep economic and ecological integration between willing countries, accompanied by new political institutions. Analysis: The major difficulty lies in the transition from the French project to the European agreement, particularly regarding taxation, social rights, and governance. Uncertain: Which countries would actually agree to participate, which rules they would adopt, and the timeline for their implementation. A presidential ambition can initiate negotiations; it does not constitute an agreement between states. ( doc.parti.re )
Main source: Libération (www.liberation.fr) Original article: See original source Author: Victor Boiteau
Additional sources
- Gabriel Attal, speech in Reims on September 17, 2026: https://doc.parti.re/2026/Discours_Europe.pdf
- Council of the European Union, functioning of tax policy: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/fr/policies/eu-tax-policy/
- Council of the European Union, Coordination of Social Security Systems: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/fr/policies/rules-social-security-systems/
- EUR-Lex, Article 20 of the Treaty on European Union: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FR/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A12016M020
- National Assembly, texts by Victor Hugo on Europe: https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/evenements/textes_victor_hugo.asp
