But simply to shelter some real property is a small step

Individual entrepreneurs in own name represent more than 1.5 million of business leaders and more than half of companies have been created in this form in 2008. This is why I am convinced that the profound aspiration of entrepreneurs in an individual form of activity must lead us to meet the most quickly, their main concern: the protection of their personal property in the event of bankruptcy. Because fails and unlike the societal forms, it is the whole of the heritage of the contractor is before! To enable risk taking and ensure the rebound of the contractor, it is therefore urgent to limit the personal consequences of a professional failure. The period of crisis which we live makes this requirement even stronger for the future.

The authorities have not remained insensitive to the situation: a principal residence exemption scheme exists since 2003 and the law of modernization of the economy has, on my initiative, extended the exemption to all non-professional real estate heritage. But simply to shelter some real property is a small step. To repair the current injustice, the contractor must be the owner of both heritages: a general heritage and one assigned to the exercise of his professional activity, which could only be wound up.

Since 1978, three reports were studied the creation of such affected heritage and a legislative proposal was even filed on this subject, ten years ago. But no reform led, so that this issue raises no legal problem insoluble. The report made me Xavier de Roux in November also to put an end to legal uncertainty. My exchanges with professionals have confirmed the viability of this initiative and the broad support which it enjoys with tradesmen and craftsmen of course, but also those who accompany them on a daily basis.

It is time for French law to clearly state that a person may have several heritage assigned to different goals. As proposed by Xavier de Roux, this assignment of heritage could pass through a declaration, for example to the trade and companies registry or directory of trades, to make it enforceable against third parties. The contractor would remain owner of the property, whatever they may be, affected in his professional activity. At the same time, these assets would constitute the guarantee for the creditors involved in the professional framework and the contractor's liability would be limited to the thus affected assets. Finally, the contractor would hold a separate accounting, allowing to follow the evolution of the affected property.

I know that some sceptics minds will point the limits of this device, the banks may make access to credit guarantees on personal heritage. But the solution, access to credit, does not always pass by the pawning of this heritage. On the contrary even, because it is not conducive to strengthening equity: when the creditor has to pledge the whole of heritage, what good capitalizing its business It is of course not issue to the contractor to heritage assigned to provide guarantees. But access to credit through before all the strengthening of institutions, such as OSEO or IAIGC, which offer guarantees to lenders and avoid the pledge of personal heritage. Access to credit also requires a strengthening of the own funds of enterprises. The success of the device for reduction of EWB for investment in SMEs to make 1 billion euros of capital to enterprises, but should go further. These two issues - the protection of the personal heritage of entrepreneurs and the strengthening of the own funds of their business to enable their growth - must be at the heart of the policy for SMEs in the coming months.