Chart: Why the French government wants to tackle Paris’s housing crisis

Yeah, you couldn’t afford this. Image: Getty.

Paris, like most of its peers at the top of the world city rankings, has a housing problem: house prices have rocketed by over 95 per cent in the past decade. The price of pre-existing apartments has tripled.

French law requires that anything sold or rented as a “living space” must be a minimum of 9 square metres, with running water, electricity, and access to a bathroom and kitchen. But rising prices have resulted in the renting and selling of illegal spaces that don’t live up to all, or any, of these requirements.

In March, The Guardian reported the story of a man paying €330 for a 1.56x1.56m room. (In case you were wondering, that means the average person wouldn’t be able to lie down in either direction. But they could lie from corner to corner, so that’s something.) La Foundation Abbe Piere, a housing action group, estimates that a fifth of the complaints they receive come from those living in tiny, illegal residences.

There is some hope. A 2012 study by the Economist found that France’s housing market was massively overvalued, with prices inflated by around 47 per cent. The crash they predicted hasn’t come about, but, after tripling in the decade to 2011, house prices to since seem to have levelled out a little. This chart shows the growth in the price of apartments in three major French cities since 2010:

Quarterly house price index of apartments. Excludes new builds. Source: CityMetric Intelligence.

As you can see, after a big, post-crash boom, prices have actually levelled out since 2011. Between 2012 and 2013, apartment prices in Paris dropped by 2.1 per cent to an average of €8,260 per square metre.

The national government has also introduced a slew of measures to tackle the problem, including two sets of legislation meant to provide more affordable rental accommodation and guarantee a stable housing market. Under the Loi Duflot, property buyers are entitled to tax reductions, and there’s a cap on estate agent fees and rents. And under Loi Alur, you can rent out your property without checking with the city government first – good news for buy-to-renters and Airbnb hosts alike.

Paris’s city government’s been doing its bit, too. In July, it announced that empty commercial buildings must be converted into useful spaces – such as apartments – or their owners will face fines. Meanwhile Anne Hidalgo, Paris’s mayor, has announced that city councillors can no longer live in council-owned accommodation.

So if you dream of owning property in Paris, don’t give up hope. That 3x3m palace could still be yours. 

 
 
 
 

Two east London boroughs are planning to tax nightlife to fund the clean up. Will it work?

A Shoreditch rave, 2013. Image: Getty.

No-one likes cleaning up after a party, but someone’s got to do it. On a city-wide scale, that job falls to the local authority. But that still leaves the question: who pays?

In east London, the number of bars and clubs has increased dramatically in recent years. The thriving club scene has come with benefits – but also a price tag for the morning clean-up and cost of policing. The boroughs of Hackney and Tower Hamlets are now looking to nightlife venues to cover these costs.

Back in 2012, councils were given powers to introduce ‘late night levies’: essentially a tax on all the licensed venues that open between midnight and 6am. The amount venues are expected to pay is based on the premises’ rateable value. Seventy per cent of any money raised goes to the police and the council keeps the rest.

Few councils took up the offer. Four years after the legislation was introduced, only eight local authorities had introduced a levy, including Southampton, Nottingham, and Cheltenham. Three of the levies were in the capital, including Camden and Islington. The most lucrative was in the City of London, where £420,000 was raised in the 2015-16 financial year.

Even in places where levies have been introduced, they haven’t always had the desired effect. Nottingham adopted a late night levy in November 2014. Last year, it emerged that the tax had raised £150,000 less than expected in its first year. Only a few months before, Cheltenham scrapped its levy after it similarly failed to meet expectations.


Last year, the House of Lords committee published its review of the 2003 Licensing Act. The committee found that “hardly any respondents believed that late night levies were currently working as they should be” – and councils reported that the obligation to pass revenues from the levy to the police had made the tax unappealing. Concluding its findings on the late night levy, the committee said: “We believe on balance that it has failed to achieve its objectives, and should be abolished.”

As might be expected of a nightlife tax, late night levies are also vociferously opposed by the hospitality industry. Commenting on the proposed levy in Tower Hamlets, Brigid Simmonds, chief executive at the British Beer and Pub Association, said: “A levy would represent a damaging new tax – it is the wrong approach. The focus should be on partnership working, with the police and local business, to address any issues in the night time economy.”

Nevertheless, boroughs in east London are pressing ahead with their plans. Tower Hamlets was recently forced to restart a consultation on its late night levy after a first attempt was the subject of a successful legal challenge by the Association of Licensed Multiple Retailers (ALMR). Kate Nicholls, chief executive at the ALMR, said:

“We will continue to oppose these measures wherever they are considered in any part of the UK and will urge local authorities’ to work with businesses, not against them, to find solutions to any issues they may have.”

Meanwhile, Hackney council intends to introduce a levy after a consultation which revealed 52 per cents of respondents were in favour of the plans. Announcing the consultation in February, licensing chair Emma Plouviez said:

“With ever-shrinking budgets, we need to find a way to ensure the our nightlife can continue to operate safely, so we’re considering looking to these businesses for a contribution towards making sure their customers can enjoy a safe night out and their neighbours and surrounding community doesn’t suffer.”

With budgets stretched, it’s inevitable that councils will seek to take advantage of any source of income they can. Nevertheless, earlier examples of the late night levy suggest this nightlife tax is unlikely to prove as lucrative as is hoped. Even if it does, should we expect nightlife venues to plug the gap left by public sector cuts?