On 1 September 2026, France begins the first operational stage of its electronic invoicing reform. For a foreign founder or overseas company, the important question is not simply whether the company has a French subsidiary. The decisive questions are where the transaction is located for French value added tax (VAT), who is liable for that VAT, whether the company is acting as seller or buyer, and which size category applies to the legal unit. A company without a French permanent establishment can therefore be outside mandatory French e-invoicing while still being inside French e-reporting.

The short answer is practical. A foreign company with no French permanent establishment generally does not have to receive or issue French e-invoices under Article 289 bis of the French General Tax Code (CGI). It may nevertheless have to transmit transaction data, and sometimes payment data, through an authorised platform when it carries out a transaction located in France for which it is liable for French VAT. In reverse-charge situations, the French or foreign buyer may carry the reporting obligation instead.

This distinction affects software selection, VAT registration, customer-onboarding evidence, payment reconciliation and the ability to defend a French tax position later. The guide below is written for foreign businesses selling into France, buying in France, or using French suppliers without creating a French branch or subsidiary. It focuses on the 1 September 2026 and 1 September 2027 deadlines, the legal tests, the data to prepare and the evidence to retain.

For the wider company-formation and governance context, see our French business law hub. This article narrows that wider question to the reporting consequences of French-taxable transactions carried out by a foreign legal unit.

It does not replace a transaction-by-transaction review. A warehouse, dependent sales team, French group company or operational office can change the permanent-establishment analysis even when the foreign company has no French company number. The first task is to separate the VAT perimeter from the corporate-registration perimeter.

I. Does French e-reporting apply to a foreign company without a permanent establishment?

A. When a foreign company is outside French e-invoicing but inside e-reporting

French e-invoicing and French e-reporting are related but different obligations. E-invoicing concerns the electronic issue, transmission and receipt of an invoice in the domestic business-to-business (B2B) perimeter. E-reporting means sending selected transaction or payment data to the French tax administration for operations that do not travel through that domestic e-invoice route. A foreign company must analyse both systems instead of treating the absence of a French branch as a complete exemption.

Article 289 bis of the CGI sets the domestic e-invoice perimeter. Its first paragraph refers to invoices where the issuer and recipient are taxable persons “établis ou ont leur domicile ou leur résidence habituelle en France” and provides that the invoices are issued, transmitted and received electronically through an authorised platform. The official text is available in the current version of Article 289 bis of the CGI. Read literally with the administration’s guidance, that rule does not turn every invoice issued by a foreign company into a French e-invoice.

The French tax administration’s English guidance for foreign companies without a permanent establishment gives the operational answer: the Article 289 bis e-invoicing system does not apply to a foreign company that has no permanent establishment in France for VAT purposes. That statement does not mean that French VAT disappears. The same guidance explains that transaction data, and in some cases payment data, must still be reported for transactions considered to take place in France and for which the foreign company is liable for French VAT. Keep the DGFiP English page on e-reporting by foreign companies without a permanent establishment in the compliance file.

“Permanent establishment” is a VAT concept that must not be confused with the existence of a French subsidiary, a Kbis, or a registered office. A Kbis is the official extract from the French commercial register identifying a registered business. A company can have no French Kbis and still have facts that require a detailed permanent-establishment analysis. Conversely, a French VAT number does not automatically prove that a full French permanent establishment exists.

The strongest recurring test is functional. Does France contain a sufficiently permanent combination of human and technical resources that can carry out the relevant supplies autonomously? In its decision of 11 December 2020, No. 420174, the Conseil d’État held that a French permanent establishment requires an installation or a non-independent person exercising habitual powers that can bind the foreign business. The decision says that an establishment must have a “degré suffisant de permanence” and a structure able to render the services autonomously. The official decision is Conseil d’État, 11 December 2020, No. 420174.

That case involved an Irish digital-marketing company and a French group company. The French employees selected advertisers, managed client accounts and performed tasks that made the services possible, even though servers were outside France. The lesson for e-reporting is not that every French contractor creates a permanent establishment. The lesson is that labels, contract signatures and server location are not enough. Operational authority, personnel, technical resources, permanence and the connection between those resources and the supplies matter.

The later decision of the Conseil d’État on 4 April 2025, No. 461220, confirmed that the same criteria remained relevant for both corporate income tax and VAT. It stated that the 2020 decision had applied the criteria already developed by European and French case law and that the changes to the VAT regime from 2010 had not changed their substance. See Conseil d’État, 4 April 2025, No. 461220. A foreign company should therefore document why its French sales support, logistics provider, consultant or group company does or does not have the autonomy and permanence required by those decisions.

The Court of Cassation also illustrates why a foreign company should not rely on a mailing address alone. In its commercial chamber decision of 16 October 2019, No. 17-28.122, the official record discusses a fiscal establishment “présentant un certain degré de permanence et une autonomie propre” and the possibility of establishing habitual activity through a permanent representative or a complete commercial cycle. The decision is Cour de cassation, commercial chamber, 16 October 2019, No. 17-28.122. The decision arose in a tax-search context, not in a claim about the 2026 e-reporting timetable, so it should be used as a risk indicator rather than as an automatic classification rule.

There is a second important distinction: a company can be liable for French VAT on a particular supply without having a permanent establishment in France. Place-of-supply rules, the customer’s status, the type of goods or services, the use of a French warehouse and the reverse-charge mechanism all affect the result. If the company is uncertain, it should write down the transaction flow and identify the party legally liable for VAT before choosing a reporting configuration.

Article 286 ter of the CGI concerns the individual VAT identification number. The provision identifies taxable persons who carry out transactions giving a right to deduction and certain intra-Community acquisitions. The current code reference is the CGI section containing Article 286 ter and the VAT obligations. A French VAT identification number is useful evidence, but it does not, by itself, answer the separate question of whether a French permanent establishment exists for VAT.

For a foreign group, the safe internal memo should therefore contain four separate conclusions: first, whether a French permanent establishment exists; second, where each relevant supply is located; third, who is liable for French VAT; and fourth, whether the operation is domestic e-invoicing, transaction e-reporting, payment e-reporting, or outside the reform. Combining all four into the single sentence “we have no French subsidiary” creates avoidable errors.

B. What changes for a seller, a buyer and a reverse-charge transaction?

The following matrix is the quickest way to locate the reporting obligation. “B2B” means business-to-business, between taxable persons acting as businesses. “B2C” means business-to-consumer, involving a non-taxable individual. “Reverse charge” means that the customer, rather than the foreign supplier, accounts for French VAT. Each row still requires a check of the precise place-of-supply rule and any special scheme.

Typical transaction	Likely French VAT position	Reporting question
Foreign company sells goods located in France to a customer without a French VAT identification number	The foreign seller may be liable for French VAT, subject to the goods and customer facts	Transaction e-reporting can apply to the foreign seller
Foreign company provides a service located in France to a French taxable business	The customer may account for VAT by reverse charge, depending on the service and applicable rule	The buyer can be the reporting party; the supplier must preserve the evidence for the reverse charge
Foreign company buys French goods or French-taxable services from a supplier not established or registered for French VAT	The foreign buyer may be liable for French VAT under the applicable acquisition or reverse-charge rule	Article 290 can require the foreign buyer to report transaction data
Foreign company sells taxable goods or services to French consumers	French VAT can be due where the transaction is located in France	Daily aggregated B2C transaction data can be required, subject to the EU One Stop Shop exception
Foreign company imports goods into France	Import VAT rules apply at importation	The DGFiP foreign-company guidance excludes imports from the described e-reporting perimeter
Foreign company makes an exempt export or intra-Community supply	The operation may be exempt subject to proof	Exempt operations are generally outside the relevant transaction e-reporting data set

Article 290 of the CGI is the central statutory provision for data reporting. Its paragraph II requires taxable persons not established in France, or their tax representative when one is required under Article 289 A, to transmit data on supplies of goods and services located in France when they are liable for VAT. The wording also covers operations where the foreign taxable person is the customer or recipient. See Article 290 of the CGI. The provision expressly states that the data are sent electronically through the authorised platform chosen by the taxable person.

This wording explains why “seller” and “buyer” must appear in the same internal decision tree. A foreign seller is not always the reporting party. If its French business customer is identified for VAT and the customer accounts for the tax by reverse charge, the customer may carry the French reporting obligation. If the customer does not have a French VAT identification number and the foreign seller is liable for French VAT, the seller’s position can be different. The invoice, customer certificate, VAT number validation and place-of-supply analysis must all tell the same story.

For international B2B supplies, the administration’s guidance identifies, among other examples, transactions made from France with another taxable person not established in France but subject to French VAT, non-exempt intra-Community acquisitions, and purchases from suppliers not established or registered for French VAT. It excludes imports and a number of VAT-exempt operations. A foreign company must not export a generic “all French sales” file to its platform: the data set should be filtered by the legal category of each operation.

For B2C transactions, the reporting pattern is different. The administration describes daily aggregated data by VAT rate, including the net taxable base and the corresponding VAT amount. A foreign operator registered for the European Union VAT One Stop Shop (OSS) is outside the transaction e-reporting requirement for the B2C transactions covered by that scheme. Keep proof of OSS registration, the scheme used and the country of consumption with the sales ledger; do not assume that an OSS registration covers unrelated domestic transactions.

Services require extra care because VAT can become chargeable when payment is collected, while the place of supply can depend on the customer’s status and establishment. A service invoice sent to a French company is not enough to prove either reverse charge or French VAT liability. The contract, customer VAT number, service description, delivery evidence and payment terms should be readable by the French accountant and by the foreign group’s finance team.

The 2014 Conseil d’État decision, No. 371538, concerned a foreign company’s French permanent establishment and French VAT on data-processing and information services. The official decision quotes the applicable territoriality rule: “Le lieu des prestations de services est réputé se situer en France lorsque le prestataire a en France le siège de son activité ou un établissement stable à partir duquel le service est rendu.” See Conseil d’État, 15 October 2014, No. 371538. The judgment found a French establishment on the facts. It is a useful warning that the service’s operational attachment can matter more than the foreign company’s registered headquarters.

When a French subsidiary, branch or dependent operating team exists, the analysis may leave the narrow foreign-company-without-permanent-establishment route altogether. The company may then have domestic e-invoicing duties, ordinary French VAT returns, or a different obligation for the French legal unit. A group should not place the parent’s data in the subsidiary’s platform profile without confirming which legal unit is the taxable person and which identifier belongs on the transaction.

The result should be written for each revenue and purchasing stream. A useful file has one line for the French customer or supplier, one for the goods or service, one for the country and establishment involved, one for the VAT liability, one for the reporting type and one for the evidence owner. That file is more defensible than a software setting named “France” with no legal explanation.

II. What must a foreign company do before the French e-reporting deadline?

A. Which platform, identifiers and VAT data must be prepared?

The first implementation decision is timing. For a foreign company without a French permanent establishment that sells goods or services, the French administration currently describes 1 September 2026 as the start date for large enterprises and intermediate-sized enterprises, known in France as ETIs (entreprises de taille intermédiaire). Micro-enterprises, very small enterprises and small- and medium-sized enterprises are scheduled for 1 September 2027 when they act as sellers or service providers. A micro, VSE or SME can choose to comply early from 1 September 2026.

The buyer rule is separate and important. A company acting as a buyer or customer liable for French VAT through a reverse-charge transaction or an intra-Community acquisition is scheduled for 1 September 2027, regardless of its size. Thus, a very large foreign group that is only a buyer in the relevant French transactions does not automatically inherit the seller deadline, while a smaller foreign seller should assess whether it has opted for early compliance.

Size is assessed at the level of the legal unit, not merely the French project. The DGFiP guidance looks at workforce, turnover and balance-sheet totals using the company’s global position. It describes a micro or VSE as employing fewer than 10 people and having annual turnover or a balance-sheet total below €2 million; an SME as having fewer than 250 employees and turnover not exceeding €50 million or a balance-sheet total not exceeding €43 million; an ETI as outside the SME category with fewer than 5,000 employees and turnover not exceeding €1.5 billion or a balance-sheet total not exceeding €2 billion; and a large company as falling outside those categories. Verify the current figures against the administration’s guidance before relying on them for a live implementation.

The relevant assessment is tied to the legal unit and a reference date, not to the number of French invoices in the current month. The group should record the legal entity name, foreign registration number, global employee count, global turnover, balance-sheet total, financial year used and conclusion on the deadline. If the group has reorganised, merged or changed its reporting perimeter, retain the calculation and the source accounts.

Next, choose an authorised platform. A “plateforme agréée” is a platform approved for transmitting the required French electronic invoicing or e-reporting data. The foreign-company guidance states that a foreign company without a French permanent establishment subject to e-reporting must choose an authorised platform before the applicable 1 September 2026 or 1 September 2027 date. The platform should be selected for the legal unit, not merely for a French customer, and the service agreement should state who maps, validates and corrects the data.

The onboarding file should include the company’s legal name, registered address, country of establishment, foreign tax identifier, EU VAT identification number where available, bank and payment identifiers, and contacts authorised to correct a rejected file. If the company has a French SIREN, which is the nine-digit national identifier for a business legal unit, it should use it where the reporting rules require it. If no SIREN exists, the administration’s guidance says to provide the intra-Community VAT number or, if there is none, a foreign tax identification number. Do not invent a French SIREN to make a software field pass validation.

A SIRET is a related fourteen-digit identifier that combines the nine-digit SIREN with a five-digit establishment number. It is not interchangeable with the SIREN. The INPI, the National Institute of Industrial Property, operates the French business formalities infrastructure; its official business formalities portal can help a group check the information attached to a French establishment when one exists. That administrative check does not replace the VAT territoriality analysis.

Build the transaction data map from the legally required invoice fields rather than from the software vendor’s default. Article 242 nonies A of Annex II to the CGI lists, among other items, the complete names and identification numbers of the taxable person and customer, VAT identification numbers, issue date, a unique chronological and continuous invoice number, delivery address where different, precise description and quantity, net unit price, VAT rate or exemption, date of delivery or service, VAT totals and the reverse-charge mention where the customer is liable. The official text is Article 242 nonies A of Annex II to the CGI.

For a foreign company, the data map should add fields that explain the cross-border decision: seller or buyer role, customer status, customer VAT number and validation date, location rule used, reverse-charge legal basis, exemption evidence, French VAT rate, payment-basis status, OSS status where relevant, and the reason an operation was excluded. These are not all new invoice words; they are the audit trail that allows the accounting team to reconstruct why the operation was or was not reported.

Article 289 E of the CGI confirms the transmission route for electronic invoice data by stating that the data of electronic invoices issued under Article 289 bis are sent to the administration by the authorised platform chosen by the taxable person. See Article 289 E of the CGI. For a foreign company outside domestic e-invoicing, the operational route is generally Article 290 transaction data rather than a domestic e-invoice feed, but the same data discipline is useful because the administration cross-checks VAT records and transaction information.

Do not confuse a PDF invoice sent by email with a compliant electronic invoice. A PDF can remain a commercial document and an accounting record, but it is not necessarily the structured electronic data transmitted through the authorised platform. At the same time, e-reporting is not necessarily a request to send a PDF copy of every transaction. The platform specification, the operation category and the applicable technical decree determine the data file. Preserve the original invoice as evidence even when only structured data are transmitted.

Before the deadline, run a controlled sample. Select one French sale, one reverse-charge service, one French purchase, one payment for a service, one B2C transaction if applicable, one exempt transaction and one excluded import. Compare the ERP output with the legal memo, the VAT return and the platform acknowledgement. Test missing VAT numbers, a rejected foreign identifier, an amended invoice, a credit note, a partial payment and a refund. A successful API connection is not proof that the mapping is legally correct.

Keep the internal deadline earlier than the statutory date. A foreign group should aim to select the platform, complete legal-unit onboarding, map fields and test acknowledgements before the applicable date. The transition timetable concerns the obligation to report, not the date by which a group can begin preparing. A month-end close that waits for the first rejection can create a backlog across several countries and make VAT return reconciliation difficult.

For official background beyond the legal text, the company can compare the English DGFiP guidance with the Service-Public business overview of electronic invoicing. The broader overview is not a substitute for the foreign-company page: the foreign company without a permanent establishment follows a specific e-reporting route. The DGFiP page on electronic invoicing and authorised platforms is also useful when evaluating platform status and the distinction between invoice exchange and data transmission.

B. How should payment reporting, deadlines and evidence be managed?

Transaction reporting is only half of the analysis. Payment reporting can apply where VAT becomes chargeable when payment is received. Article 290 A of the CGI covers payment data for operations referred to in Articles 289 bis and 290 where the tax is due upon collection, except where the customer is liable for the tax. It says that payment data are communicated electronically by the authorised platform and identifies the taxable person subject to Article 290 as one possible reporting party. See Article 290 A of the CGI.

The data are narrower than a complete cash ledger but must be reliable. The administration describes the collection date, the amount collected for each VAT rate and, where relevant, the invoice number for supplies of services and advance payments for goods where VAT becomes chargeable on receipt. The entity receiving payment, normally the invoice issuer, reports the payment data. A foreign company should be able to link each payment event to the invoice, VAT rate, contract, customer and bank statement.

The payment obligation does not apply in the same way to every invoice. The administration’s guidance excludes the option to pay VAT on debits from the payment-data route and excludes reverse-charge transactions reported by the customer. This makes the payment-basis setting a legal parameter, not simply an accounting preference. A company that selects “cash basis” in its ERP without checking its VAT option can transmit the wrong information.

Article 269 of the CGI is relevant because it identifies the taxable event and chargeability of VAT. For services other than specified exceptions, the provision states that VAT is due “lors de l’encaissement des acomptes, du prix, de la rémunération” unless the taxable person has opted for payment on debits. Consult the official Article 269 of the CGI and confirm the version applicable to the transaction. Payment reporting cannot be configured correctly without knowing when the tax becomes chargeable.

The practical control is a three-way reconciliation. First, reconcile the invoice and transaction file. Second, reconcile the reported payment event to the bank receipt, collection date and VAT rate. Third, reconcile the reported data to the relevant French VAT return. Credit notes, deposits, instalments, retentions, netting, payment by a group company and foreign-currency receipts need written rules. If a customer pays a French invoice from a parent account, identify the legal payer and the date on which the supplier actually received the price.

Record the reporting frequency and cut-off. Article 290 provides that the data and periodicity are specified by decree. The applicable frequency can depend on the company’s VAT arrangement and the type of data. Do not substitute the monthly VAT-return calendar for the e-reporting calendar. The accounting policy should show the data cut-off, the person approving the file, the platform transmission timestamp, the acknowledgement or error code, and the correction process.

Evidence is particularly important for an overseas company because the French administration may not see the full commercial context. Retain the customer’s VAT status, the customer’s country and establishment details, shipping and delivery evidence for goods, proof of where services were actually used, contracts with French vendors, warehouse arrangements, personnel and technical-resource information, VAT registrations, OSS evidence, exemptions, platform acknowledgements and the reconciliation to the French VAT return. Store the documents with a consistent transaction identifier.

For a reverse-charge sale, the evidence should explain why the customer, not the foreign supplier, reported the operation. For a foreign purchase, it should explain why the foreign company became the person liable for French VAT and why Article 290 applies. For a B2C sale, it should support the consumer’s location, the applicable rate and whether OSS removes the operation from this e-reporting route. The file should also identify any operation treated as an import, export or exempt transaction and retain the customs or exemption evidence.

The group should monitor its French footprint as part of the payment control. A new French employee, a local sales authority, a dedicated office, a warehouse operated by the group, or a French affiliate taking decisions can change the permanent-establishment analysis. The 2020 Conseil d’État decision, No. 420174, held that a company can have a French permanent establishment when a French entity habitually decides transactions that the foreign company merely endorses. The exact decision describes the French company as one that “décide de transactions que la société irlandaise se borne à entériner”. That is a factual warning for operational teams, not a conclusion that every French affiliate creates a permanent establishment.

The 2025 Conseil d’État decision, No. 461220, shows the cost of treating a foreign filing position as self-proving. The court held that a French group company had constituted a permanent establishment of the Irish company in the earlier litigation and rejected the argument that compliance in Ireland alone resolved the French obligations. The decision records that a French establishment can lead to French corporate income tax and VAT consequences. Read the full No. 461220 decision before approving a group policy that relies only on foreign tax returns.

A failed platform transmission should produce a useful error, not a silent omission. Define who receives the error, who decides whether the underlying VAT position must be corrected, how a resubmission is linked to the original file, and how the company proves that a duplicate was not created. Preserve the platform’s acknowledgement and the final accepted payload. If the platform is unavailable, follow its documented contingency process and record the outage, the affected transaction range and the correction date.

The sanctions provision should be read with care. Article 1737 of the CGI contains specific penalties for certain invoice and platform failures, including invoice-level amounts and formal notice mechanisms. See the current Article 1737 section of the CGI. The existence of an e-invoice penalty does not allow a reader to assume that every e-reporting omission attracts the same amount. The precise obligation, effective date, operation category and transition rule must be checked before advising on exposure.

Use the following operational checklist before the applicable reporting date:

1. Confirm that the legal unit has no French VAT permanent establishment, or document the facts that require a different analysis.
2. Map every French-related revenue and purchase stream by goods or services, customer status, country, VAT place-of-supply rule and person liable for VAT.
3. Classify each operation as domestic e-invoicing, transaction e-reporting, payment e-reporting, OSS, import, export, exemption or outside the scope.
4. Calculate the legal unit’s global size category using the relevant reference accounts and record the reason for the 2026 or 2027 deadline.
5. Select an authorised platform for the legal unit and verify the platform’s onboarding, identifiers, file format, correction and acknowledgement procedures.
6. Validate SIREN, SIRET, EU VAT and foreign tax identifiers; never populate a French identifier that the legal unit does not possess.
7. Test Article 242 nonies A invoice data, reverse-charge wording, VAT rates, exemptions, credit notes and payment-basis fields.
8. Reconcile transaction and payment payloads to invoices, bank receipts, VAT returns and the supporting evidence file.
9. Monitor changes in French people, premises, warehouses, affiliates and decision-making authority that could create a permanent establishment.
10. Keep a dated legal memo and a platform acknowledgement for the first live reporting cycle.

In a dispute or audit, the most useful evidence is not a screenshot showing that a platform account was opened. It is a coherent chain from the contract and transaction to the VAT analysis, invoice or e-reporting record, payment event, platform acknowledgement and VAT return. That chain should also show who made the decision and when.

A foreign founder should also coordinate the French company’s existing compliance architecture. The company formation file, the registered-office record, the Kbis where a French legal unit exists, the French VAT number, the tax representative mandate where required and the platform profile should not contain contradictory addresses or legal names. The *greffe* is the registry office associated with the commercial court; where a French legal unit exists, changes recorded through the business formalities system should be compared with the VAT records. URSSAF, the French social-security collection body, and BODACC, the official bulletin for civil and commercial announcements, are not e-reporting authorities, but a change in the company’s French activity recorded elsewhere can be a useful trigger for a compliance review.

Finally, schedule a post-implementation review after the first VAT return and after the first significant payment cycle. Check rejected records, duplicate records, missing foreign identifiers, unexpected French VAT rates, unreported deposits, customer reverse-charge evidence and the platform’s actual treatment of amendments. A foreign company that revisits the configuration after live data begins is more likely to find a classification error before it becomes a repeated monthly pattern.

Conclusion

A foreign company without a French permanent establishment is generally outside France’s domestic e-invoicing obligation under Article 289 bis, but it is not automatically outside French e-reporting. From 1 September 2026, large and intermediate-sized foreign sellers must assess transaction reporting; smaller sellers generally move to 1 September 2027, with an early option described by the administration. Foreign buyers liable for French VAT through reverse charge or intra-Community acquisitions are scheduled for 1 September 2027 regardless of size.

The correct answer depends on the transaction, not on the founder’s nationality or the absence of a French subsidiary. First determine the permanent-establishment and place-of-supply facts. Then identify the person liable for VAT, classify the operation, calculate the global size category, select an authorised platform, map identifiers and invoice data, and reconcile payment events to the VAT return. Maintain evidence that allows a French reviewer to understand the decision without reconstructing the entire foreign group.

The 2026 reform is therefore a systems project and a legal classification project. A short written memo for each transaction family, paired with a tested reporting workflow and a monitored French footprint, is the most reliable way for an overseas company to meet the deadline without accidentally treating e-reporting as either a universal invoice exchange or a complete exemption.