Becoming the owner of one’s primary residence remains the stated goal of a majority of French households. According to INSEE, about 58% of them occupy a property they own. This figure, stable for over ten years, masks a more contrasted reality: since the rise in interest rates in 2022-2023, the total cost of purchasing real estate has persistently exceeded rent in several major French cities. Therefore, the question deserves a technical examination, item by item.
Real cost of a mortgage after the rise in rates
The nominal rate of a loan represents only a fraction of the real cost of the purchase. To fairly compare buying and renting, one must add together the monthly loan payments, borrower insurance, notary fees (which can reach several points of the price in the old market), annual property tax, and ongoing maintenance charges.
Before 2022, many borrowers benefited from a negative real rate: the interest rate was lower than inflation, which mechanically reduced the weight of the debt. This situation has disappeared with monetary tightening. The increase in credit costs has cut the borrowing capacity of first-time buyers, sometimes by several tens of thousands of euros at the same monthly payment.
This shift changes the minimum holding period required to make a purchase profitable. An owner who sells before amortizing the entry costs (notary, guarantee, file fees) loses money compared to a tenant who would have invested their down payment. In tight markets, this holding period can far exceed the three or four years often cited. To explore the advantages and disadvantages of becoming an owner with Immobilier du Net, it is essential to integrate these often underestimated costs.
Real estate assets and primary residence: a unique investment
The most common argument in favor of buying can be summed up in one sentence: repaying a loan is building wealth, while rent is “lost.” This idea relies on a shortcut. Rent finances a service (housing), just as loan interest finances the cost of borrowed money. Only the capital portion of the monthly payments truly enriches the borrower, and this portion is small in the early years of a traditional amortizable loan.
The primary residence offers a net tax advantage: the capital gain upon resale is exempt from tax. This is a lever that neither direct rental real estate (subject to social levies of 17.2%) nor most financial investments possess. In the long term, this advantage weighs heavily in the overall calculation.
However, concentrating the majority of one’s wealth in a single illiquid asset exposes one to localized market risk. An owner whose property loses value (factory closure, neighborhood decline, natural disaster) suffers a direct loss without the possibility of quick diversification. Real estate is not a guaranteed investment, contrary to what the term “safe haven” suggests.
Taxation 2026: what changes for owner-occupiers
The recent evolution of French taxation alters the balance between buying and renting. Social levies on rental income remain fixed at 17.2% in 2026. At the same time, the LFSS 2026 has raised levies on certain financial incomes (dividends, capital gains on stocks) to 18.6%.
This differential strengthens the relative position of the primary residence compared to financial investments. The owner-occupier does not generate taxable “income”: they benefit from an untaxed implicit rent, an invisible but very real advantage. In clear terms, living in one’s own home rather than receiving rent or dividends amounts to receiving net income after tax.
For direct rental investment, the calculation is less favorable. Deductible expenses (interest, repairs, insurance) partially offset the taxation, but net profitability after social levies requires a case-by-case analysis. The status of owner-occupier remains, from a tax perspective, the most protected.
Property tax: a consistently rising charge
Property tax is an exclusive charge of the owner. Its amount varies significantly from one municipality to another, and annual revaluations of the tax bases follow inflation. A tenant does not pay this tax. Over the total holding period of a property, the accumulated property tax can represent a significant cost, rarely included in simplified calculators.
Housing stability versus professional flexibility
Real estate purchase offers a stability that renting does not guarantee. The owner-occupier risks neither eviction for sale, nor indexed rent increases, nor refusal of renewal. For a household settled permanently in a city, this security has concrete value, especially as retirement approaches, when income decreases while rent continues.
This stability comes at a cost: mobility. Selling a property takes several months, incurs costs (agency fees, diagnostics, notary) and depends on the state of the local market. A tenant can leave their accommodation with one to three months’ notice. For profiles whose careers require frequent relocations, renting remains financially more rational.
Here are the criteria that tip the balance towards buying:
- A holding horizon of more than five to six years, to amortize entry costs and benefit from the leverage of credit
- A stable professional situation in an area where the real estate market is not overheated
- A residual savings capacity after repayment, to avoid being “house poor” (owning a home but lacking financial margin)
- A family life project compatible with a sustainable geographical anchoring
The balance between buying and renting is not just a matter of monthly payment calculation. Taxation, holding duration, local market conditions, and professional trajectory weigh as heavily as the interest rate. A household that buys at the wrong time or in the wrong city can suffer financially.
Conversely, a disciplined tenant who invests the difference between rent and monthly payment can build equivalent wealth. Ownership is not an end in itself; it is a wealth tool among others, to be evaluated coldly based on one’s actual situation.