For a British owner, receiving a French taxe foncière bill while a house is empty, damaged or impossible to occupy can feel illogical. The tax is nevertheless not based simply on whether you slept in the property during the year. France separates the annual tax on ownership of built property from taxes linked to occupation, such as the taxe d’habitation sur les résidences secondaires (tax on a furnished second home) and the taxes on vacant homes. That distinction matters after Brexit because a UK passport, a UK address and a French holiday home do not create a general exemption.

The useful question is narrower: was the French property normally intended to be let, did a vacancy outside your control last at least three months, and can you prove the precise period and condition of the building? Article 1389 of the French General Tax Code (Code général des impôts, or CGI) can then support a reduction, called a dégrèvement, for the relevant months. A private second home undergoing voluntary refurbishment is a different and much weaker case. This article sets out the legal test, the evidence a British owner should preserve, the deadline, the payment strategy and the separate treatment of related French and UK tax questions.

For the wider question of correcting a French occupancy record and challenging a wrong property-tax bill, see our guide to correcting an occupancy declaration for a UK owner. The present article deals with the narrower relief available when a property intended for letting becomes genuinely unavailable.

I. Can a British owner claim relief from French taxe foncière when the property is uninhabitable?

A. What does French taxe foncière cover, and why does Brexit not cancel it?

Taxe foncière sur les propriétés bâties (TFPB) means the French property tax on built property. Article 1380 of the CGI states, in the official text, that « La taxe foncière est établie annuellement sur les propriétés bâties sises en France ». The location of the building is therefore central. The tax is attached to a French property, not to the nationality of its owner and not to the number of days that the owner is physically present in France.

The practical starting point is the position on 1 January of the tax year. Service-Public explains that a person who owns or has usufruit (a legal right to use property and receive its income while another person holds the bare title) on that date is normally liable for TFPB. A British owner who lives in Kent, Scotland or elsewhere in the UK can therefore receive a French bill for a house in Normandy, Brittany, the Dordogne or Paris even if the house was shut for the whole winter. Brexit changed immigration and some cross-border reporting questions; it did not remove French local property taxation.

The assessment is not normally calculated from the rent you actually receive. Article 1388 of the CGI provides that TFPB is established from the property’s valeur locative cadastrale, meaning its cadastral rental value, with the statutory deduction for costs. Article 1494 adds that the value is determined for each property, or separately usable fraction of a property, normally intended for distinct use. Those provisions explain why a house may remain assessed while it is empty: the tax base is a legal valuation of the property, not a monthly invoice for occupation.

A serious defect can still matter, but “uninhabitable” is not itself a magic word. A roof damaged by a storm, a flood, a fire, a serious structural problem, an official safety measure or the absence of essential services may help establish that the property could not reasonably be let. The facts must then be connected to the statutory relief and to the period claimed. A property that is merely inconvenient, dated, unfurnished or awaiting improvements is not automatically outside TFPB.

This is why a British owner should first identify the exact tax named on the notice. TFPB is different from the taxe d’habitation on a second home, the taxe sur les logements vacants (TLV, tax on vacant homes in qualifying areas) and the taxe d’habitation sur les logements vacants (THLV, a local tax on certain vacant homes). A claim under Article 1389 concerns a particular TFPB reduction. It should not be presented as a universal cancellation of every tax connected with the address.

There is also a practical distinction between the tax and the refuse charge shown on the same bill. The taxe d’enlèvement des ordures ménagères (TEOM, household refuse collection tax) is an annexed charge. The French tax authority states that the Article 1389 reduction can extend to annexed taxes, including TEOM, but the calculation should still be checked against the notice. It is safer to ask the tax office to identify the exact amounts covered by the relief than to assume that every line disappears.

For a UK owner, the first diagnostic questions should therefore be:

• Who owned the property, or held the usufruit, on 1 January?
• Does the notice concern TFPB, a second-home tax, TLV, THLV or several of them?
• Was the building intended to be let, or was it solely a private second home?
• What event made occupation or letting impossible, and on what date?
• What document proves the start and end of the relevant period?

Those questions avoid the common mistake of arguing only that the owner was abroad. Non-residence can be relevant to other French tax and immigration matters, but it is not by itself a ground for cancelling TFPB on a French building.

B. When does Article 1389 apply, and why is an uninhabitable second home different?

Article 1389 I of the CGI is the central provision for this narrow claim. It covers the vacancy of a house normally intended for letting, or the non-operation of a commercial or industrial property used by its owner. For the residential case, the official text requires three cumulative features: the vacancy must be independent of the taxpayer’s will, it must last at least three months, and it must concern the whole building or a part capable of separate letting. The text uses the expressions « indépendante de la volonté du contribuable », « une durée de trois mois au moins » and « la totalité de l’immeuble ».

First condition: a vacancy outside the owner’s control. The owner must show more than a decision to leave a property empty. A tenant’s unexpected departure, an insured disaster, a legally imposed prohibition on occupation, a major water or fire loss, or a defect that objectively prevents letting may support the condition. The file should explain what happened, why a normal letting could not continue, and what steps were taken to restore the property or find a tenant once it became usable.

By contrast, a voluntary decision to hold a French holiday home for personal use, postpone works until a convenient date, wait for a higher rent or keep a property available for occasional family visits is usually difficult to reconcile with a vacancy independent of the owner’s will. The same caution applies when a British owner has never advertised the house, never instructed an agent and has no credible letting history. The legal wording refers to a house normally intended for letting; it does not create a general relief for any empty private residence.

Second condition: at least three months. The period must be continuous and documented. The calculation begins with the date on which the qualifying vacancy started, but the reduction is calculated by complete months under Article 1389. The tax authority describes the relief as running from the first day of the month following the start of the vacancy to the last day of the month in which the vacancy ends. A short gap between tenants or a few weeks of decorative work may not pass the statutory threshold. A longer period caused by a serious insured loss may do so, provided the other conditions are proved.

Third condition: the whole building or a separately lettable part. A single unusable bedroom in a house will not automatically justify a reduction on the whole assessment. The owner should identify the affected area and explain whether it could have been let separately. If the defect affects the structure, essential services or the only access to the dwelling, the evidence may show that the entire home was unavailable. If only an annex, garage or one floor was affected, the claim should be limited and technically explained rather than overstated.

The word “uninhabitable” should therefore be used as evidence of the reason for the vacancy, not as a substitute for the Article 1389 test. Photographs, an expert report, a procès-verbal de constat (a formal report prepared by a commissaire de justice, formerly called a bailiff), an insurer’s loss report, a municipal order, repair quotations and utility records can establish the physical condition. They do not, by themselves, prove that the house was normally intended for letting or that the owner acted promptly to restore its availability.

Two recent official decisions illustrate why the evidential detail matters. In the Court of Appeal of Versailles, 20 June 2024, RG 21/05944, a property manager dispute concerned several vacant properties and rejected applications for TFPB relief. The court recorded that some properties were « manifestement pas louables en l’état » because of serious damage, but it also examined whether the owner had provided the documents needed to show that the vacancy was outside his control and whether the claim was made in time. This was not a direct ruling granting Article 1389 relief to a British owner; it is a warning that physical damage and procedural proof must be dealt with together.

In the Court of Appeal of Paris, 22 September 2025, RG 23/01340, the dispute principally concerned the valuation of a property for inheritance tax. The court nevertheless considered the evidence of a seriously degraded house and noted that « la maison n’a pas été alimentée en électricité et en gaz depuis 1990 ». The decision did not create an automatic TFPB exemption, but it demonstrates the practical value of dated utility evidence, a formal inspection and a consistent history of the building’s condition.

The safer reading of those decisions is modest: courts look at the actual condition and the documents, not at a label placed on the property after the event. A British owner should avoid relying on a general statement from a builder or a telephone conversation with a local tax office. Ask for a written assessment, preserve the full file and link each document to a month in the claim period.

There is an additional trap for furnished holiday lets and seasonal accommodation. Service-Public’s TFPB guidance states that seasonal and furnished lettings are not covered by this particular vacancy reduction. That does not decide every possible issue under TLV, THLV or a different exemption, but it means that an owner should not describe a short-term holiday property as an ordinary long-term rental without checking the legal and factual classification. The purpose for which the property is held, the type of letting offered and the records of actual marketing all matter.

A British family that has bought a house only as a second home should also keep the argument separate. If the property was never normally intended for letting, Article 1389 may not be the right route, even if renovation makes the house impossible to occupy. The better questions may concern a wrong occupancy classification, the taxable status of a second home, an incorrect cadastral description or another statutory exemption. Those are different claims and should be supported by the correct provision rather than folded into a general “uninhabitable” complaint.

II. How should a UK owner document and challenge the French property-tax bill?

A. What evidence, deadline and procedure should you use?

Start with a timeline, not a long narrative. Put the property address, tax year, ownership date, vacancy start date, date on which the three-month period was reached, date of any repair or re-letting and date of the claim in a single table. Then attach documents to each event. A French tax office can understand a concise chronology more easily than a collection of English emails with no French property reference or tax year.

A useful evidence pack for a British owner may include:

• the TFPB notice, including the assessment number and the address as shown by the French administration;
• the title or notarial document showing ownership, and any usufruit or bare-ownership arrangement;
• the former tenancy agreement, letting mandate, online listing, agent’s letters, viewing records and evidence of a tenant’s withdrawal;
• the insurer’s claim reference, loss adjuster’s report, emergency invoices, building expert’s report and dated photographs;
• an order from the mayor, prefect or another competent authority if occupation was prohibited or restricted;
• electricity, gas and water statements showing the absence of normal use, while explaining that low consumption alone is not decisive;
• repair quotations, invoices, planning or safety documents and proof of payment;
• correspondence showing when the property became available again and what steps were taken to let it;
• the occupancy information shown in the French tax authority’s “Biens immobiliers” service, with a correction request if it is wrong; and
• a calculation of the months and the amount of TFPB and TEOM for which relief is requested.

Documents from the UK can help. A UK insurer’s loss report, a bank record showing payment for emergency works, an email from a British managing agent or a contractor’s invoice can support the chronology. Translate the key factual points into clear French or provide a short English explanation beside the French document. The tax office should not have to guess whether a document concerns the French property, a UK address or another asset.

The statutory deadline is precise. Article R*196-5 of the Livre des procédures fiscales (LPF, the French Tax Procedures Book) states that claims for the Article 1389 reduction « doivent être demandés au plus tard le 31 décembre de l’année suivant celle au cours de laquelle la vacance […] atteint la durée minimum exigée ». If the minimum period is reached in 2026, the outer statutory date is 31 December 2027. Calculate the deadline from the year in which the qualifying three-month period is reached, while also checking the tax year and the specific months claimed. Do not wait for a favourable discussion with an agent if the deadline is approaching.

Submit the claim to the tax service responsible for the property, normally the service des impôts des particuliers (SIP, personal tax office) or the relevant property-tax service. The official impots.gouv.fr procedure allows a claim through the secure messaging facility in the taxpayer’s online space. A non-resident British owner who cannot use the online route should write to the service named on the notice, using the exact French address and assessment reference. Keep proof of sending and a copy of every attachment.

The request should identify the legal basis, the property, the tax year, the qualifying period, the amount sought and the evidence attached. A practical opening might state that the owner is requesting a dégrèvement de taxe foncière sur le fondement de l’article 1389 du CGI because the house normally intended for letting was vacant for more than three continuous months for a cause outside the owner’s control. The rest should explain the chronology in plain, factual language. Avoid claiming a full cancellation if the documents support only a reduction for certain months or a separable part.

Answer any request for further information quickly. The tax office may ask for proof that a letting was genuinely intended, evidence of marketing, the date of the tenant’s departure, the nature of the works, the reason they were unavoidable or a document showing when the house could be used again. A British owner should preserve the original metadata of photographs, invoices and utility records. If a document is in English, provide a short translation of the operative lines rather than sending an unexplained bundle.

Case law also shows the cost of missing the procedural step. The Versailles decision cited above recorded a tax authority’s refusal of a claim for one tax year because it was made too late, even though the owner argued that supporting documents existed. The court also treated a later refusal as connected to the absence of evidence that the vacancy was independent of the owner’s will. The lesson is not that every damaged house qualifies; it is that a good factual case can still fail when the deadline or proof is left until after the event.

If the administration rejects the claim, read the decision carefully. It may say that the property was not normally intended to be let, that the vacancy was voluntary, that the three-month period was not established, that the wrong tax was challenged or that the claim was late. Each reason requires a different response. A fresh bundle of photographs will not cure a jurisdiction or deadline problem. A challenge to the property’s classification may need a separate correction of the cadastral or occupancy information.

For a substantial amount or a property held through an estate, trust-like arrangement or usufruit, a lawyer should review the notice and the evidence before the administrative litigation deadline. The central issue is often not the English translation of “uninhabitable”; it is the legal character of the property, the owner’s intention, the exact tax year and the chain of proof connecting the physical defect to an involuntary vacancy.

B. What should you do about other French taxes, payment and the UK side?

Correct classification is as important as the Article 1389 claim. Article 1418 of the CGI requires owners of residential premises to provide occupation information to the French tax administration and says, in the official text, « En cas de vacance du local, le motif de celle-ci est précisé ». The “Biens immobiliers” service is therefore not just an administrative formality. An incorrect record can cause the administration to treat a genuine second home as occupied, a let property as owner-occupied or a vacant building as a furnished residence.

Article 1407 of the CGI concerns the second-home tax. It states that taxe d’habitation sur les résidences secondaires is due for furnished premises used as a home other than as the principal residence. A British owner who has already received a separate second-home bill should not assume that an Article 1389 TFPB reduction cancels it. If the property was not furnished, could not be used as a dwelling or was incorrectly described, make a separate, evidence-based claim against that tax.

TLV and THLV require the same separation. If a notice concerns a tax on vacant homes rather than TFPB, the impots.gouv.fr procedure asks the owner to use the secure messaging service or write to the SIP and to attach documents such as a tenancy agreement, works quotations or proof of occupation. The legal test is not identical to Article 1389. A property made unusable by major works may have a strong factual explanation, but the owner should identify the tax code provision and the authority responsible for the particular notice.

Keep paying attention to payment dates while a claim is being considered. A tax complaint does not automatically suspend payment. Article L277 of the LPF provides that a taxpayer who expressly asks for a sursis de paiement (a stay of payment) in the complaint, and states the amount or basis of the requested reduction, may defer the disputed part while the complaint is decided. The request is not automatic: it must be written clearly. For a high amount, the administration may require security. The owner should also understand what happens if the claim is rejected.

Article 1663 of the CGI provides that direct taxes are generally payable thirty days after the role is made collectible. The notice itself gives the operative payment date. If the tax is paid while a claim is pending, keep the payment evidence; a successful reduction can then be followed by reimbursement. If payment cannot safely be made, request the statutory stay at the same time as the complaint rather than simply ignoring the bill. The official tax guidance also warns that an unsuccessful claim can leave the tax payable and expose the taxpayer to late-payment consequences.

Do not use a complaint about TFPB to reopen the cadastral value without evidence. Article 1494 concerns the value for a property or separately used part, and Article 1388 concerns the calculation basis. If the problem is that the recorded size, use, amenities or condition produces an incorrect valuation, request a review of the assessment with plans, photographs, measurements and comparable evidence. That is a valuation argument. It can coexist with a vacancy claim, but it should be stated separately so the tax office can answer each issue.

The UK tax side is separate again. GOV.UK explains that UK residents may have to pay UK tax on foreign income, including rental income and savings interest, and that double-tax relief depends on the applicable rules. The official guidance on tax on foreign income and UK income for people living abroad should be checked if the French property is let, if the owner remains UK tax-resident or if the property is connected with a UK business or estate. A reduction of French TFPB is not a declaration of UK residence and does not, by itself, settle any UK income or capital-gains question.

Conversely, a UK address, a UK mortgage or payment of UK tax does not replace the French evidence needed for Article 1389. Keep French and UK files in parallel: one file for the French property tax notice, French property documents, vacancy proof and French claim; another for HMRC reporting, UK income and any treaty or foreign-tax-credit work. This separation reduces the risk that a French tax office receives a document relevant only to a UK return, or that an HMRC file treats a French local tax as if it were rental income.

A British owner facing a refusal should ask four final questions before deciding whether to appeal:

1. Was the challenged amount actually TFPB, and was Article 1389 the correct legal basis?
2. Can the file prove that the property was normally intended for letting and that the vacancy was outside the owner’s control?
3. Does the timeline prove three continuous months and comply with the 31 December deadline?
4. Was payment made, or was a properly worded sursis de paiement requested?

Conclusion

A British owner does not lose French taxe foncière merely because a property is empty or impossible to occupy. The potential relief is narrower: Article 1389 of the CGI can reduce TFPB for a house normally intended to be let when the vacancy is outside the owner’s control, lasts at least three months and concerns the whole property or a separately lettable part. A private second home, a voluntary renovation project or a seasonal furnished letting may fall outside that route.

The strongest file combines a precise timeline, proof of the property’s letting purpose, dated evidence of the defect, proof of efforts to restore or re-let the building, the correct tax notice and a claim made before the statutory deadline. TFPB, second-home tax, vacant-home taxes and UK reporting should be kept separate. If the amount is significant or the property is held through an estate or usufruit, obtain a review before sending the claim or requesting a stay of payment.

Need a quick opinion on your case?

Our firm offers a telephone consultation within 48 hours with a lawyer from the cabinet to identify the correct French tax, evidence and challenge route.

We can review your notice, vacancy timeline and supporting documents before the deadline. Call +33 6 46 60 58 22 or use the contact form.