Warning, hot topic! Thursday, October 6, the deputy Aude Luquet (MoDem, Seine-et-Marne) must defend, in first reading in the National Assembly, a text on the taxation of alimony. This single mother, who is raising a 9-year-old boy, intends to speak out for single-parent families who have long been denouncing tax injustice.
Concretely, after a separation, each of the parents is bound by a maintenance obligation with regard to the child. Also, the custodial parent – the mother in the vast majority of cases – advances the daily costs, while the other parent compensates through a maintenance payment fixed between them or by the judge.
Problem, when completing their tax return, they find themselves in two different situations: the parent who paid the support can deduct it from their taxes, while the other must declare it as income. For one, it will lower the tax, for the other, it will increase it. This is what the bill is attacking, which, although already rewritten in committee, aimed to reverse the tax burden.
“Remove alimony from the field of taxation”
“Maintenance is not an income, but the simple extension of the maintenance obligation laid down in the Civil Code, in order to ensure the needs of the child”, justifies Johan Jousseaume, education manager at the Trade Union Confederation of Families. According to him, therefore, it is necessary “withdraw alimony from the field of taxation”.
If this request receives a wide echo among single-parent families, some experts remain cautious. Michel Villac, president of the High Council of the family, certainly welcomes the fact “that reflection progresses to arrive at a more balanced system”. However, he believes that this will not necessarily go through the envisaged reform. “It would be better to remove alimony from the calculation of the reference income of certain social aid, the RSA for example. »
A false good idea
The National Union of Family Associations fears a false good idea. “We understand the MP’s reasoning, admits Claire Ménard, in charge of parliamentary relations. However, transferring the tax burden to fathers will amount to increasing their tax. They therefore risk asking to lower the amount of child support, which will not be in the best interests of the child. »
During its passage in committee, the text received a mixed reception. The MoDem, the Nupes and the RN supported it, Renaissance abstained and LR voted against.