A French company controlled by founders, shareholders or directors living abroad must treat 1 September 2026 as an operational deadline, not as a distant software project. From that date, every business established in France and subject to French value added tax (VAT), including a company under the French VAT exemption threshold, must be able to receive electronic invoices from its suppliers. The obligation to issue electronic invoices is phased differently: large companies and French mid-cap companies must issue them from 1 September 2026, while small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and micro-businesses generally have until 1 September 2027. The distinction matters for a foreign group that owns a French subsidiary, a French branch, or a company that buys services from a foreign parent. A PDF sent by email is not, by itself, the new regulated channel. The French company must select an authorized platform, make its legal and establishment identifiers routable, connect the accounting workflow, preserve the original data, and document who may act for the company from abroad. This guide explains the scope, the cross-border boundary, the concrete pre-launch checklist, and the response to a failed platform or an administrative notice. It should be read with the existing French company compliance calendar for foreign founders, because electronic invoicing now affects the daily tax and accounting calendar.

I. What must a French company do before 1 September 2026 to receive e-invoices?

A. Does a foreign-owned French company have to receive an e-invoice in 2026?

The first question is not whether the founder lives in France. It is whether the relevant business is established in France and falls within the French VAT system. A French SAS (société par actions simplifiée, a flexible private company), SASU (single-shareholder SAS), SARL (société à responsabilité limitée, a limited-liability company) or French subsidiary normally meets the establishment test. Foreign ownership does not remove the French company from the reform. The same practical approach applies to a French establishment of a foreign company when that establishment is the French VAT-facing unit. A branch is not a separate legal person, so its VAT position and the exact data used for routing should be checked rather than assumed.

The official tax administration states that the reform covers businesses subject to VAT whatever their turnover, legal form or VAT regime, including businesses using the French “franchise en base” (the small-business VAT exemption). It also states that a business that does not issue invoices may still have to receive suppliers’ electronic invoices. That is important for a newly incorporated French company owned by a foreign parent: no French sales, a dormant launch phase, or no French employee does not by itself remove the company’s reception obligation.

The legal framework is anchored in Article 289 bis of the French General Tax Code (CGI). The CGI, or Code général des impôts, is the French General Tax Code. Its operative wording provides that electronic invoicing applies when the issuer and recipient are VAT-taxable persons established, domiciled or habitually resident in France, and that “L’émission, la transmission et la réception des factures électroniques s’effectuent en recourant à une plateforme agréée.” In English, the statutory mechanism is not a private agreement to exchange PDFs: issuance, transmission and reception use an authorized platform.

The official timetable is deliberately asymmetrical. All in-scope businesses must be ready to receive on 1 September 2026. Large businesses and ETIs (entreprises de taille intermédiaire, French mid-cap companies) must also issue electronically from that date. TPEs (très petites entreprises), SMEs and micro-businesses generally move to mandatory electronic issuance on 1 September 2027. A foreign group should therefore classify the French legal unit, not the parent’s marketing description. A French subsidiary may be a small company even when the parent is a multinational; conversely, a French entity can fall into a larger category if the rules identify it as part of a relevant tax group or assujetti unique.

There is a second boundary that prevents a common mistake. Domestic e-invoicing and e-reporting are related but not identical. The tax administration describes e-invoicing as the electronic exchange of qualifying domestic business-to-business transactions between VAT-taxable businesses established in France. Transactions involving a foreign operator, private customers, exports, intra-Community transactions or certain reverse-charge situations may instead create transaction or payment e-reporting duties. The French company should not mark every foreign-parent invoice as a domestic e-invoice merely because the French subsidiary pays it.

For a foreign business with no French establishment for VAT purposes, the answer may be the reverse. The administration’s dedicated international guidance explains that e-invoicing does not apply to such a foreign business merely because it performs a transaction connected with France. However, e-reporting can apply where the foreign business is liable for French VAT on an operation located in France. Depending on its size and role, its reporting timetable can begin on 1 September 2026 or 1 September 2027. An overseas parent should therefore analyse its own status separately from the French subsidiary’s reception obligation.

A useful three-column analysis is:

1. French legal entity: identify its VAT status, SIREN, establishments, clients, suppliers and the platform that will receive domestic business invoices.
2. French branch or fixed establishment: confirm whether the branch is the VAT-established unit, which SIRET (the fourteen-digit establishment identifier) is used, and which legal or accounting team is responsible for the platform account.
3. Foreign parent with no French establishment: test e-reporting, reverse charge, foreign identification data and the date at which that parent must select a platform, without confusing that analysis with the subsidiary’s e-invoice reception.

The company should keep this classification in a short written memo. It should name the French entity, its legal form, its VAT position, the relevant activity, the foreign entities in the invoicing chain, and the reasons a transaction is classified as e-invoicing, e-reporting or outside the reform. This is especially useful when the founder, finance team and accountant are in different countries and a platform onboarding form asks for information that the parent group normally holds centrally.

B. What must a foreign founder choose: an authorized platform, an ERP connection or both?

The company must choose an authorized platform, known in French practice as a plateforme agréée and often described as a PDP, or partner dematerialization platform. The expression “authorized” matters. A normal invoice application, a bank portal, a shared mailbox, or an overseas electronic data interchange provider is not automatically entitled to receive and route French e-invoices. The public tax administration publishes the list and status of authorized platforms. The decision should be based on the French company’s actual workflow, not only on the parent’s preferred software.

The official platform guidance explains that an authorized platform may issue and transmit electronic invoices, receive them, and transmit invoice, transaction and payment data to the administration. The platform must be able to communicate with the recipient’s platform. Under Article 242 nonies E of Annex II to the CGI, the platform must offer services that protect the authenticity of origin, integrity of content and readability, identify recipients through the central directory, transmit invoices to the recipient’s chosen platform and make received invoices available. A company selecting a platform should ask for written confirmation that these functions are active for the exact French entity and establishment.

The choice is not necessarily a choice between the platform and an enterprise resource planning system. An ERP is the group’s accounting or enterprise system. It may connect to the authorized platform through an approved interface, or the finance team may use the platform’s portal for manual entry. The legal obligation concerns the authorized channel and the company’s ability to receive and preserve invoices; the technical choice concerns how people and software reach that channel. A foreign founder should obtain a diagram showing where an invoice enters, where it is validated, where it is posted to the general ledger, and where the original structured data is archived.

Before signing, request answers to these questions in writing:

1. Is the provider on the current public list of authorized platforms, rather than merely a software reseller or future applicant?
2. Can it receive invoices addressed to the French company’s SIREN and each relevant SIRET, including a new establishment created after incorporation?
3. Can it handle French invoice data, the company’s VAT number, reverse-charge wording, currencies and foreign supplier records?
4. Does it provide a structured file such as UBL, CII or an accepted hybrid format, together with a human-readable view?
5. Can the foreign director, finance manager, accountant or French representative have separate accounts, permissions, two-factor authentication and an audit trail?
6. What are the service levels, export rights, incident-notification procedure, retention period, subcontractors and exit process?
7. How will the platform notify the company of rejected invoices, duplicate invoices, status changes, missing identifiers and supplier corrections?

The statutory text also makes the central directory part of the mechanism. Article 289 bis creates an annuaire central that contains the information needed to address invoices to the recipient’s platform. The company should not assume that the address entered in its public Kbis extract—the Kbis is the official commercial-registry extract—automatically equals the invoice routing line. It should check the platform’s onboarding output, the legal entity identifier, each establishment identifier, and any routing code used for a group or shared service centre.

For a founder abroad, the mandate is as important as the software. If the accountant or French legal representative accepts the platform’s terms, the company should record the authority on which that person acts. The current Annex II rules on Article 242 nonies E bis require the recipient platform to hold the company’s formal agreement for updating the central directory. That agreement includes identification data for the company, the platform and, where relevant, the former platform; it is dated and signed by the company or its agent. The founder should preserve the signed mandate, board or shareholder authorization where needed, and the confirmation that the platform has activated the right entity.

The choice should be made before the legal deadline, even if the company expects few invoices. A foreign-owned company often receives invoices before it makes its first sale: legal fees, accounting, office services, software, travel, insurance, advertising and parent-company services. The reform is therefore not only a sales-invoice project. It is a purchase-to-pay project that begins with the first French supplier.

II. How should a foreign founder test routing, records and cross-border invoices?

A. How do SIREN, SIRET, VAT and the French e-invoicing directory fit together?

A foreign founder should treat identification data as a legal control, not as a minor onboarding field. A SIREN is the nine-digit identifier of the French legal unit. A SIRET is the fourteen-digit identifier of a particular establishment and combines the SIREN with an establishment number. The VAT number identifies the entity for VAT purposes. The RNE, or Registre national des entreprises, is the national register of businesses. The Kbis extract is a registry document generally used to evidence the company’s legal identity and registered information. The INPI, the French National Institute of Industrial Property, operates the Guichet unique, the single online business-formality portal, and provides access to business records and formalities.

The INPI guidance on SIREN and SIRET allocation explains that the SIREN becomes visible in the Guichet unique dashboard after the competent body validates the formality, and that the SIRET can be assigned by INSEE (the National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies) when necessary. A foreign founder should not invent or recycle a number from a parent company. The French legal entity must be mapped to its own SIREN; each location that receives or issues invoices may need its own SIRET and establishment data.

On the invoice side, Article 289 of the CGI requires the company to ensure that a qualifying invoice is issued and requires the authenticity of origin, integrity of content and readability to remain assured through the retention period. The statutory text says: “L’authenticité de l’origine, l’intégrité du contenu et la lisibilité de la facture doivent être assurées.” For a foreign group, that means the French entity should be able to show how it knows that an invoice came from the supplier, that its data did not change improperly, and that it can still be read and matched to the underlying purchase.

The French Commercial Code adds the commercial baseline. Article L. 441-9 of the Commercial Code states: “Tout achat de produits ou toute prestation de service pour une activité professionnelle fait l’objet d’une facturation.” It also sets out the parties’ identification and invoice-preservation framework. The e-invoicing reform changes the channel and data format; it does not remove the need to reconcile the invoice with the contract, order, delivery, service completion, tax treatment and payment record.

The platform’s directory data should therefore be tested with real-life variants:

1. an invoice addressed to the company’s legal name and SIREN;
2. an invoice for the registered office or a second establishment using a different SIRET;
3. an invoice from a French supplier that knows the company by its trading name rather than its legal name;
4. an invoice from the foreign parent that is not a domestic French B2B e-invoice;
5. a credit note referring to the original invoice;
6. an invoice received while the company is changing its registered office, VAT position or platform;
7. an invoice involving a French branch, tax representative or group service centre.

Use a controlled test supplier or a platform sandbox where available, and record the identifier, date, status and destination. Ask the accountant to confirm that the invoice arrives in the correct entity ledger rather than in the parent’s ledger. A foreign founder should also nominate a substitute user in France or in the European time zone. A single founder’s email address is not a resilient legal or operational control.

The structured invoice is not simply a PDF with a new file extension. The tax administration lists formats such as UBL, CII and a hybrid consisting of structured data with an image component. Its official explanation of the reform states that an ordinary scanned paper invoice, ordinary PDF or document sent by email will not be the compliant electronic-invoice channel. The human-readable image can be useful for review, but the structured data is what allows routing, automated processing and data transmission.

Invoices in English are not automatically invalid. However, Article 289 of the CGI permits the tax service, for audit purposes, to require a French translation when an invoice is written in a foreign language. The company should therefore retain the original foreign-language invoice, the structured data, the readable rendering and, when material, an internal French or English accounting note explaining the service, VAT treatment and link to the contract. This is not a substitute for the invoice’s mandatory data; it is evidence that a remote finance team can understand and defend the transaction.

Electronic transmission does not replace the VAT return. The company must continue to determine the place of supply, the applicable VAT rate or exemption, reverse charge, VAT deduction and payment date. The platform may transmit data to the tax administration, but the company and its tax adviser still need to review exceptions. A foreign parent should not treat a platform’s technical acceptance as a tax opinion.

B. What happens if the company misses the deadline or a platform fails?

The first response to a missed deadline should be operational and evidential. Confirm whether the company failed to choose a platform, chose one but did not complete the formal directory agreement, used the wrong SIREN or SIRET, failed to activate a user, or suffered a platform incident. These are different failures. Preserve screenshots, email headers, supplier notices, platform ticket numbers, timestamps, rejected status reports, the original invoice file and the accounting entry. A foreign founder should ask the platform for a dated incident report rather than relying on an informal telephone statement.

The sanction for failure to use a platform for reception is not the same as the sanction for late e-reporting or for issuing an invoice in the wrong form. Article 1737 of the CGI provides a notice sequence when the administration identifies an omission or failure to use an authorized platform for reception. The company is first put on notice to comply within three months. If the failure persists, a €500 fine can apply; after a further three-month period of persistence, the fine can rise to €1,000, with further €1,000 fines after successive three-month periods. The statutory wording should be read in its version applicable to the relevant invoices and date.

For electronic issuance, Article 1737 also provides a €50-per-invoice fine for failure to issue an invoice electronically under Article 289 bis, subject to the annual cap stated in the text. For e-reporting obligations, Article 1788 D of the CGI provides a €500-per-transmission fine, with an annual cap of €15,000 for the relevant taxpayer obligations and a first-infringement repair rule in the conditions specified by the article. The accounting team must identify which obligation was missed before it calculates an exposure.

The data-transmission obligation is separate from the channel used to receive a domestic invoice. Under Article 289 E of the CGI, “Les données des factures électroniques émises en application du I de l’article 289 bis sont transmises à l’administration par la plateforme agréée choisie par l’assujetti.” In other words, an authorized platform is part of the reporting chain. A business should reconcile what the platform transmitted with its VAT and accounting records, particularly for credit notes, advances, services taxable on receipt of payment and transactions involving foreign suppliers.

For a foreign company without a French establishment, the dedicated international regime can produce a different result. The tax administration explains that e-invoicing does not apply to that company merely because its customer is French, but e-reporting can apply when the foreign company owes French VAT. The buyer may have the e-reporting duty in a reverse-charge situation. The administration also states that such a foreign business may need to choose an authorized platform for transmitting its data before the relevant 2026 or 2027 date. The parent’s finance team should keep the foreign company’s e-reporting analysis separate from the French subsidiary’s domestic-invoice routing.

Platform failure does not automatically erase the company’s own duties. A platform contract should provide continuity, export and incident procedures. Article 242 nonies E ter of Annex II to the CGI sets out a procedure for changing platforms and updating invoice-addressing data, including deadlines for the incoming and outgoing platforms. The company should use those rules if the provider is unreliable, but should not switch the directory informally or leave suppliers guessing. During an incident, notify key suppliers, use the platform’s documented fallback, preserve the invoice and technical evidence, and obtain professional advice if a tax filing or penalty notice is imminent.

Delegating to a French accountant or a group service centre does not necessarily transfer every risk. In CE, 9 December 2022, no. 461887, the Conseil d’État explained that the rules on Article 1728 penalties “ne sauraient être interprétées comme autorisant l’administration à mettre cette pénalité à la charge du contribuable lorsque celui-ci n’a pas pris personnellement part au défaut ou au retard déclaratif.” The decision concerned a tax-return penalty, not the new e-invoice fine, so it is not a promise that a founder will avoid every sanction. It does show why responsibility and participation should be documented: who had the mandate, who controlled the account, who received the notice, and who could correct the failure.

Retention is part of the response. Before 1 September 2026, Article L. 102 B of the Tax Procedure Code requires relevant books, records, documents and supporting material to be kept for six years and, when received electronically, kept in that form for the prescribed period. From the reform date, the article continues to require invoices to be preserved in conditions that maintain authenticity, integrity and readability. The company should not retain only the PDF preview if the platform generated a structured file, delivery status, correction message or audit trail.

The Cour de cassation’s commercial chamber underlined the breadth of accounting evidence in Cass. com., 26 February 2013, no. 12-14.771. The decision refers to “toutes celles qui ont une corrélation certaine avec les données de la comptabilité commerciale,” which includes invoicing-related material. For a foreign-owned company, the retention folder should link the invoice to the purchase order, engagement letter, delivery or service evidence, approval record, payment, VAT analysis, credit note and platform status. A remote finance team should be able to reconstruct that chain without asking the founder to search personal email.

Finally, use an escalation matrix:

1. Technical failure: open a platform incident, preserve evidence, verify whether delivery was delayed or rejected, and inform affected suppliers.
2. Identification error: correct the company’s SIREN, SIRET, VAT number, legal name or routing line through the platform and, where relevant, the INPI or INSEE record.
3. Tax classification error: ask the accountant to review domestic e-invoicing, e-reporting, reverse charge, exemption and payment-reporting treatment.
4. Administrative notice: identify the exact statutory obligation, the date of the notice, the three-month cure period and the evidence of correction; do not answer with a generic statement that the platform was selected.
5. Group governance problem: document who has authority to change the platform, approve invoice data, respond to a French tax service and sign a mandate on behalf of the French company.

This matrix protects the company from a common cross-border failure: the parent believes the French accountant is handling the setup, the accountant believes the software provider is connected, the provider has the wrong establishment identifier, and suppliers continue sending invoices to an inactive address. The solution is not another general software subscription. It is a verified legal-entity map, a signed mandate, a tested routing path and a controlled archive.

Conclusion

For a French company owned by foreign founders, the 1 September 2026 deadline is principally a reception and routing deadline. The company should classify its French entity or establishment, distinguish domestic e-invoicing from foreign-transaction e-reporting, select an authorized platform, sign the formal directory agreement, map SIREN, SIRET and VAT data, test real invoice scenarios, assign resilient users and preserve the structured evidence. The parent company’s overseas systems can remain part of the workflow, but they cannot be allowed to conceal the French legal entity or replace the authorized French channel.

The one-year delay for SME issuance does not justify waiting. A company that receives supplier invoices today will need a functioning intake, review and archive process on the first day of the reform. A company that sells to French businesses should use the additional time to test its own issuance path before 1 September 2027, while larger entities must address issuance immediately. Where a platform fails, the company should preserve evidence, use the formal mobility and incident procedures, and obtain a targeted review of the applicable obligation and response deadline.

Need a quick opinion on your case

Book a telephone consultation within 48 hours with a lawyer from the firm.

We can review your French company’s platform choice, cross-border invoicing map and response to a tax or platform notice.

+33 6 46 60 58 22 — contact the firm.