Rental Real Estate in 2026: Can the Jeanbrun Program Unseat the LMNP?
The 2026 Finance Act introduces a change to real estate taxation: for the first time, a depreciation mechanism applies to unfurnished rentals. Known as the “Jeanbrun measure,” this new tool aims to revive investment in a market stifled by rising interest rates and the housing crisis. But does this mean we should abandon the LMNP status (non-professional furnished landlord), a long-standing benchmark for tax optimization?
Depreciation for Unfurnished Rentals… Under Certain Conditions
Until now, depreciation has been limited to furnished rentals. Under the LMNP scheme, the owner can deduct a portion of the property’s actual value (excluding land) and the value of the furnishings each year, significantly reducing—or even eliminating—the tax on rental income. The Jeanbrun scheme extends this principle to unfurnished rentals, but within a strict framework.
Four cumulative conditions must be met. The housing must be new, or existing with at least 30% renovation work. It must be purchased between 2026 and 2028. The landlord agrees to lease the property for nine years without the option of early termination. Finally, rent caps and tenant income limits apply.
This last point changes everything. While the LMNP allows for market-rate rents—which are often 15 to 40 percent higher than those for unfurnished rentals—the Jeanbrun law imposes “intermediate,” “social,” or “very social” rent levels, which vary by geographic area. In major metropolitan areas, the gap between purchase prices and capped rents quickly erodes profitability.
Two Opposing Tax Philosophies
Beyond the legal constraints, the difference is technical.
Under the Jeanbrun method, depreciation is calculated on a flat-rate basis: it applies to 80% of the property’s value, at a rate ranging from 3% to 5.5%. The amount is capped at between 8,000 and 12,000 euros per year… per tax household. Two apartments therefore share the same allowance.
Under the LMNP scheme, the calculation is based on the actual value of the components (structural work, roofing, systems, and furnishings). There is no annual cap, and each property is treated separately. For an investor who owns multiple properties, this is a decisive advantage.
However, the Jeanbrun scheme still offers one advantage: the property-related loss generated can be offset against total income up to a limit of 10,700 euros per year. The tax savings are immediate and proportional to the marginal tax rate. Under the LMNP scheme, losses can be carried forward only against future BIC profits.
The Cash Flow Test: A Definitive Verdict
The JD2M simulations, based on a new 50 m² apartment financed 90% by a loan at 3%, shed light on the debate.
In Paris (Zone A bis), the Jeanbrun program for intermediate-level rent generates a negative cash flow of –1,885 euros per year. For very low-income rent, the loss amounts to –7,267 euros. The LMNP program, on the other hand, yields +960 euros.
In Lyon, the difference is also clear: +937 euros for an intermediate Jeanbrun property versus +3,331 euros for a furnished rental. In Strasbourg, +2,289 euros versus +5,347 euros. The same is true in Quimper and Niort: the LMNP doubles or even triples annual cash flow.
The reason is simple: higher rents and uncapped depreciation better offset the cost of borrowing. As purchase prices rise, the Jeanbrun model loses steam. The enhanced depreciation rate from the very low rent never compensates for the drop in rental income.
Who is the ideal investor for the Jeanbrun scheme?
The new scheme is not without its merits. It may appeal to a taxpayer in a high tax bracket (marginal tax rate of 30% or higher) who is purchasing a property in a provincial town at a moderate price and is willing to hold onto the property for nine years. In this case, offsetting the property tax loss can improve overall returns.
But for an investor seeking flexibility, returns, and the potential for growth, the LMNP scheme remains a step ahead. It allows you to adjust the lease each year, provide housing for a student child, or retain seasonal use of the property. Above all, it remains accessible to existing property owners, whereas the Jeanbrun scheme is reserved for properties acquired between 2026 and 2028.
A Reform That Is More Symbolic Than Revolutionary
The Jeanbrun measure introduces a long-awaited tax innovation: depreciation for unfurnished rentals. However, the caps on rent and depreciation, combined with the term requirement, limit its appeal in tight markets.
In terms of pure profitability, the figures are consistent: the LMNP comes out on top in all the cities studied. The Jeanbrun appears to be a targeted tool, geared more toward housing policy than toward maximizing asset returns.
In a context where access to credit remains the main obstacle to investment, the issue may go beyond taxation. After all, without the ability to borrow, no measure—no matter how innovative—can truly revive the real estate market.
