France passes first reading of 5.5-cent-per-GB levy

France passes first reading of a 5.5-cent-per-gigabyte levy

An amendment approved in first reading of the French 2027 budget seeks to tax the data flowing across the internet at a rate of 5.5 cents per gigabyte received in France. The figure sounds tiny until you multiply it: according to circulating estimates, a two-hour 4K film on Netflix would carry up to €0.77 in gross tax, a 150 GB video game €8.25, and recovering 200 personal photos stored on Google €11. Restoring 2 terabytes of backups after a computer failure: €110.

The text was approved by the National Assembly by 11 votes to 10, with 35 members present. In other words: a handful of seats deciding the tax framework of the French digital economy. The Senate, the joint committee and the final text still lie ahead, and the Government opposes it. The usual outcome in such cases is that the amendment falls by the wayside. But the mere fact that it passed a vote already says a lot about where the legislator's mind is.

The mechanics matter: the levy falls on the platforms, not on the user, and is measured by the volumes recorded by operators. The figures in the examples are theoretical calculations that assume the platform passes the entire tax on to the customer. And that's the catch: some argue that US platforms will not absorb the cost and will deduct it from the consumer's bill.

How much would watching a film on Netflix cost under the per-gigabyte levy?

The calculation is simple, and that's why it hurts. It taxes the data transmitted, not the service. It makes no difference whether it's a series, a backup or a work file: the meter runs by the gigabyte. The official logic presents it as an ecological measure that incentivises reducing the volumes of data exchanged. The argument is somewhat amusing when the person signing it has never had to upload 2 TB to the cloud after a dead hard drive.

Some argue this penalises the mere act of transmitting information, just as artificial intelligence multiplies data traffic. The paradox is no small one: the very countries that say they want to accelerate the digital transformation approve tax instruments that tax its basic input. The result, if it goes ahead, is — according to critics of the measure — a two-estimulante ilegal internet: one for those who can pay for every gigabyte and one for those who ration their bandwidth.

Is a website exempt based on data volume?

That's the open question. The amendment targets large flows and the platforms sending data to French users, but the fine detail — thresholds, exemptions, who measures and how — is not settled. Nor is the timetable: without the approval of the Senate and the joint committee, the text is nothing more than an intention. The Government opposes it, which lowers the odds but does not eliminate them.

The political reading is the usual one: when the treasury needs revenue, it looks to where the flow is. And today the flow is digital. VAT already taxes every transaction, collections are hitting records, and yet new instruments are being sought. Some point to the temptation of replicating the model in Spain.

---

The implementation detail remains, and that's where these things bleed out. Measuring gigabytes per user, distinguishing lawful traffic from private copies and billing foreign platforms requires a control infrastructure that no operator has budgeted for. As easy to announce as it is hard to execute. If the text survives the process, the reasonable prediction is that the French consumer ends up paying for the party with another surcharge on the bill. If it falls, it will stand as the perfect example of how to legislate by headline rather than by calculator.