The McKinsey case takes a legal turn. A few days before the first round of the presidential election, the National Financial Prosecutor’s Office (PNF) announced on Wednesday April 6 that it had opened an investigation into the practices of“Tax optimization” of the consulting firm, revealed by the Senate inquiry committee and denounced by the opposition.
>> Presidential 2022: the article to read to understand the controversy over the McKinsey cabinet
The investigations, which began on March 31, relate to acts of “aggravated laundering of tax evasion” accused of the French branch of the American firm McKinsey, between 2011 and 2020. Franceinfo answers five questions about this survey.
1Why did the PNF open an investigation?
The financial public prosecutor, Jean-François Bohnert, explained, in a press release published on April 6, that he opened this investigation after having read the report of the Senate’s commission of inquiry into the influence of private consulting firms. on public policies.
In this document published on March 16, the commission of inquiry ensures that the contracts concluded by the State had “more than doubled” between 2018 and 2021, reaching a cost estimated at 894 million euros in 2021. The McKinsey firm, which notably advised the government on France’s vaccination strategy, is cited in the work of elected officials. With more than 12 million euros billed during the health crisis, he is the one to whom the executive has had the most recourse.
However, the senators claim that “McKinsey is indeed subject to corporation tax (IS) in France” but that “its payments have been zero euros for at least 10 years, while its turnover on national territory reached 329 million euros in 2020”. The commission of inquiry backs up this assertion with “two checks on documents and on the spot (…) carried out at the Ministry of Economy and Finance”.
The investigation opened by the PNF only concerns this question of taxation and not the rest of the report. The investigations were entrusted to the Service d’Enquêtes Judiciaux des Finances (SEJF), a “tax police” service, placed under the supervision of the Ministry of Action and Public Accounts.
2What does McKinsey answer?
The McKinsey firm ensures, in a text published on April 6, to stand “at the disposal of the competent administrations and authorities”. The group is however surprised by the “focus” on his case and “reaffirms that the firm complies with the French tax and social rules applicable to it. The tax approach applied by McKinsey is similar in the countries where it has been present and has been consistent for years. This approach is in line with the guiding principles of the OECD and has been shared with the French tax authorities.”
3What is the government’s position?
Wednesday, on TF1, the president-candidate Emmanuel Macron, whose end of campaign was shaken up by this affair, estimated that it was “a very good thing” that an investigation be opened “when we say that a company would have defrauded”. He also took up the argument that McKinsey’s non-payment of corporation tax was due to existing tax rules, claiming to have “beaten” at European level so that they change soon.
The same day, at the end of the Council of Ministers, the spokesman Gabriel Attal assured that the government, “from the beginning, called for the full truth to be told about the tax practices of this consulting firm”. A “Tax audit train has been ordered by the Ministry of Finance” as early as November 2021, he added. For his part, the Minister of the Economy, Bruno Le Maire, reaffirmed on Thursday that McKinsey would pay “all that they owe as tax to the French public treasury”.
He also said “understand emotion” of the French vis-à-vis this case, their questions about the suspicions of tax evasion by the firm McKinsey and the use of consulting firms in general. “We are going to check if there is not a way to employ these consulting firms less”he pledged.
4How does the opposition react?
In the middle of the presidential campaign, the political opposition to the head of state has been asking for the opening of an investigation into what they consider to be favoritism, the majority of which would show for the benefit of this consulting firm.
The presidential candidates therefore welcomed the opening of an investigation. “Better late than never”reacted Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, Thursday on franceinfo. “It was time”, lambasted the LR candidate, Valérie Pécresse. Same comment on the side of the communist Fabien Roussel or Eric Zemmour, who have in passing welcomed the work of parliamentarians on this subject.
For his part, the candidate Nicolas Dupont-Aignan regretted that the investigation did not bear “only on tax evasion”hoping for investigations into possible “conflicts of interest”. As for the president of the National Rally, Jordan Bardella, he wondered about a “state scandal” who “raises a fundamental question: who is running France?” The spokesperson for La France insoumise, Adrien Quatennens, also reacted to the opening of the investigation, on Europe 1, wondering about “such an increased use of these consulting firms”.