The return of the retirement age to 62 has been deemed inadmissible under the Constitution. From there to say that the project is definitively buried?
A major blow for the National Rally. This Thursday, October 31, the far-right party aimed to submit to the vote of the deputies the return of retirement to 62 years. A fight led by Marine Le Pen and her allies, as well as the elected representatives of the left constituting the New Popular Front, this bill had left hopes nourished in the population, still hostile to the reform adopted in force by Elisabeth Borne in 2023. The two parties being in agreement on the subject and representing more than the majority of the hemicycle, the adoption seemed all mapped out. Except that in the end it will not be the case.
Two main reasons for this turnaround. First, the political and ideological war between the RN and the NFP. For the left-wing deputies, it was unthinkable to ally with the LePéniste party and vote in concert for an idea that emerged from their ranks, even though it also corresponded to their ambitions. The text was thus rejected by the Finance Committee, forcing the National Rally to take a new legislative path: amendments on its own proposal.
However – and this is the second reason for this setback – the admissibility of the amendments is judged by the President of the National Assembly, Yaël Braun-Pivet, a loyal supporter of the "common core" macronisto-republican, which relied on the Constitution and its article 40: “Amendments are not admissible when their adoption would result in either a reduction in public resources or the creation or aggravation of a public charge.” The deputies will therefore not be able to vote on the return to 62 years.
The project is not, however, definitively buried. At the end of November, it will be the left that will try, in turn, to have a similar bill voted on at the Palais Bourbon. It remains to be seen what fate will be reserved, in advance, for this text.
Latest updates
17:51 – How did the RN want to finance retirement at 62 years old ?
While the pension reform was deemed necessary by Emmanuel Macron to ensure the financial sustainability of the system, the return to 62 years requires finding new funds to ensure the payment of pensions. To do this, the RN wanted to create a new tax on the purchase of company shares (capital securities) and increase the excise duty on tobacco. However, in its explanatory statement for the proposed law, the RN did not quantify the revenue that would have been perceived by these levers.
17:38 – What did the National Rally propose ?
The RN proposal aimed to restore a fairer retirement system by cancelling the latest reforms concerning the retirement age and the number of annuities. This text aimed to return to the old retirement rules. Marine Le Pen and her colleagues in the chamber wanted to reestablish the age of entitlement at 62 years old from the 1955 generation (instead of 64 years from the 1968 generation) and return to 42 years of contribution from the 1961 generation.
17:31 – A technical and political rejection
Thinking it was trapping the left, the RN was trapped. Initially, the text was presented to the Social Affairs Committee. There, the deputies adopted or not the different articles of the bill. The main one, that of the return of the retirement age to 62, was rejected: the Macronists and LR voted against, as well as three left-wing deputies, while 19 NFP deputies abstained. The RN being in the minority in this committee, the article was not adopted.
Thus, it was without its flagship measure that the bill was going to be submitted to the vote of all the deputies of the National Assembly. However, the RN still had one lever to reintegrate the departure at 62: to submit an amendment… on its own bill, which could have been voted on by all deputies.
However, for an amendment to be put to a vote, it must be in accordance with the Constitution. Since the return to retirement at 62 would entail significant additional expenditure for the State coffers, it was therefore deemed unconstitutional and will therefore not be presented to parliamentarians tomorrow.
It is therefore technical and political reasons that have led to the failure of this attempt to repeal the pension reform.
17:23 – Why did the left not support the RN text ?
In the Assembly, the RN has come up against political wars. If an absolute majority of deputies defend the return of retirement at 62, it is unimaginable for the left to vote for a text defended by the extreme right. The NFP criticizes, in particular, the RN for not having been present during the demonstrations against the reform. However, the left always says it places itself in the general interest… But not to the point of voting with Marine Le Pen and her ilk. Even if it means to alienate voters. LFI, the PS, the environmentalists and even the communists did not want to form a common front with the RN and give it more weight.
200% Deposit Bonus up to €3,000 180% First Deposit Bonus up to $20,00017:15 – What does article 40 of the Constitution say ?
Cited above, Article 40 of the Constitution states that “proposals and amendments made by members of Parliament are not admissible when their adoption would result in either a reduction in public resources or the creation or increase of a public burden.”
It had been looking bad for some time, it is now official: this Thursday, October 31, the deputies will not vote to repeal the pension reform. The National Rally's project was deemed financially inadmissible under the Constitution (Article 40). The return to the retirement age of 62 will therefore not be on the agenda for tomorrow's vote in the chamber. It remains to now know if the left will be able, for its part, to defend the same project next month.
10/29/24 – 4:51 p.m. – The RN will vote for the repeal proposed by LFI
While the left refuses to vote for the RN text due to ideological warfare, the far-right party, for its part, announced that it would support the rebellious initiative at the end of November. On LCP, RN MP Laure Lavalette announced that “if it is the repeal of Elisabeth Borne's bill [which is put to the vote, editor's note], yes we will vote for it.” “We have always voted in the interest of the French people,” she declared on La chaîne parlementaire on October 25.
10/29/24 – 12:03 – How does LFI want to finance retirement at 62 years old ?
In its bill, La France Insoumise proposes to finance the return of retirement at 62 by increasing the tobacco tax as well as by creating a new tax on oil and gas companies. When these companies have a turnover of more than 750 million euros and the net result is, at a minimum, 1.25 times higher than the average results of the three previous years, then a tax of 20 to 33% would be applied. For LFI, this would generate enough revenue so that the French would not have to work two more years.
10/29/24 – 08:33 – What does LFI propose for pension reform ?
According to the bill published by LFI, the deputies of the rebellious group want nothing more and nothing less than the return of the retirement age to 62 for anyone born on or after January 1, 1955, if all annuities (42) are validated, as the RN advocates.
10/29/24 – 06:32 – Another bill to repeal the pension reform
It is not only the RN bill that could repeal the pension reform. La France insoumise has also joined in the dance. Like the far-right party, the group will also have a parliamentary niche on Thursday, November 28, 2025. On that day, Mathilde Panot, Eric Coquerel, Manuel Bompard and others will defend their turn the repeal of the reform.
10/28/24 – 5:02 PM – No absolute majority for the repeal of the reform
In the Assembly, the RN risks running into political wars. While the absolute majority of deputies defend the return to 62, those of the Socialist Party will not vote for the repeal of the pension reform brought by the RN to the Assembly on October 31. “We do not vote for or associate ourselves with any initiative of the National Rally,” indicated the elected officials of the party with the rose. The environmentalists, communists and LFI are also not inclined to vote for a proposal from the extreme right. With this choice, the RN could, at most, only collect 164 votes (cumulative votes from the RN, Ciotti's group, and possibly LIOT). Not enough to obtain an absolute majority. If the latter is not necessary to pass a text, it is still preferable to ensure the blow.
10/28/24 – 12:04 – Vote on the RN bill prevented ?
Beyond the consensus that must be reached within the National Assembly, the RN bill risks running into a major problem: time. Indeed, as it will be discussed within the party's parliamentary niche, it must be voted on during the day, at midnight at the latest. Political cunning could then come into play to thwart Marine Le Pen's plans. “We can imagine that the deputies hostile to the repeal of the 64-year rule will obstruct in such a way as not to meet the deadline. This has already happened, for example in November 2022, with a text aimed at banning bullfighting, which had been blocked by an avalanche of amendments,” anticipates Benjamin Morel, lecturer in public law at the WorldWorld.