A foreign company can be required to appoint a French VAT representative when it carries out taxable operations in France and cannot use the European Union or mutual-assistance arrangements that allow it to deal directly with the French tax authorities. That appointment is not a simple postal address. The representative may have to file returns, pay French VAT, pay interest and penalties connected with the represented operations, answer audit correspondence and preserve the evidence needed to explain the tax position. The practical exposure can therefore be substantial when the foreign company does not fund its VAT account or stops responding.
The answer to the question in this article is precise rather than absolute. The foreign company remains the legal taxpayer for the VAT. The representative is nevertheless exposed to a statutory payment and compliance obligation within the scope of the appointment. That exposure does not automatically extend to French corporate income tax, to every debt of the company or to a representative who was only an optional agent in a case where no fiscal representation was required. The result depends on the company’s country, the taxable operations, the effective date of the appointment, the wording of the tax notice and the version of the rules applicable on the relevant date.
This article explains the current framework as at 27 August 2026, the transition from Article 289 A of the French General Tax Code to the CIBS (Code des impositions sur les biens et services, the French Tax Code on Goods and Services), and the safeguards identified by the Conseil d’État and the Paris Administrative Court of Appeal. For the wider steps involved in establishing a business, see the firm’s France business formation and corporate support page.
I. Is the French VAT representative personally exposed when the foreign company does not pay VAT?
A. When must a foreign company appoint a representative rather than a mandataire?
The first question is not whether a service provider has agreed to receive mail. It is whether French law requires a fiscal representative for the operations in question. “VAT representative” in this article means the person or company formally appointed under the French VAT rules. It is different from a commercial agent, a local accountant, a director of a French subsidiary or an optional mandataire, meaning an agent who performs formalities without becoming the statutory fiscal representative.
The current starting point is Article L152-2 of the CIBS. In simplified terms, a taxable person that is not established in the European Union and does not benefit from the relevant mutual-assistance route must use a representative in France for the VAT obligations covered by the code. The assessment must be made operation by operation. A foreign company may sell to French consumers, import goods, provide business-to-business services, use a marketplace, hold stock in France or make transactions for which the French customer accounts for VAT under a reverse-charge rule. Those facts do not all lead to the same result.
The scope of the appointment also matters. Article L152-3 of the CIBS states: “Le redevable dispose d’un représentant fiscal unique pour l’ensemble des impositions relevant du présent code et des obligations qui en résultent.” In English, the taxable person has one fiscal representative for the taxes governed by the CIBS and the resulting obligations. The word “unique” prevents a company from treating several representatives as interchangeable for the same French VAT perimeter. The file should identify which entity is the taxable person, which representative is accredited, and when that representation starts and ends.
There are important exceptions. A company established in another European Union Member State will commonly deal with France without a mandatory fiscal representative, although it may appoint an optional mandataire to submit forms or communicate with the tax office. The same can apply to a company established in a country covered by the relevant administrative-assistance arrangement. The official French tax administration guidance for non-resident businesses explains that the absence of a mandatory representative does not transfer the company’s own responsibility to an optional agent. The French Customs guidance on VAT identification and fiscal representation also distinguishes an optional agent used by a European business from the fiscal representative required for certain businesses established outside the European Union.
The customer can sometimes be the VAT debtor. This is common in reverse-charge situations, particularly for some business-to-business services and imports. The foreign company should therefore map each flow before assuming that its representative bears the payment. A representative cannot be made responsible for VAT that the law places on the French customer merely because the representative appears in the company’s registration file. Conversely, a company cannot avoid a valid representation obligation by labelling its service provider a “mandataire” in a private contract when the statutory conditions require a fiscal representative.
The representative must also satisfy formal conditions. Article L152-4 of the CIBS requires a qualifying company, consent, authorisation and French establishment and VAT identification conditions. The accreditation file is not decorative. Article 242 septdecies of the French General Tax Code refers to information concerning the representative’s identity, organisation, resources, criminal-record position, financial solvency or guarantee, the represented business and its activity, the representative’s undertaking to perform the obligations and pay the tax, and the designation document. A foreign company should ask for evidence of the effective accreditation and not rely only on a letterhead or a French VAT number.
The transition date must be recorded in every new file. Older disputes refer to Article 289 A of the French General Tax Code, which is the historic statutory basis for the representative’s obligations. The current consolidated page records its scheduled repeal from 1 September 2026 as part of the transfer to the CIBS framework. That does not erase liabilities relating to earlier periods, and it does not make an old appointment impossible to analyse. The governing version, the taxable period and the date of each filing or notice must be checked separately.
An extract from the French Trade and Companies Register, known as a Kbis, may help identify the company and its French establishment, but it does not prove the full VAT perimeter. The greffe, meaning the court registry that issues or records corporate filings, is not the tax authority. A Kbis can show a registered address or a representative’s corporate identity while leaving open the critical questions: which transactions were covered, whether the appointment was accepted, whether it was still effective, and who had to pay each item shown on the VAT return.
The practical test is therefore a three-step test:
- Is the foreign company established outside the European Union or outside a qualifying mutual-assistance framework?
- Is the specific French operation one for which the foreign company, rather than its French customer, is the VAT debtor?
- Was the person described as representative formally appointed and authorised for the relevant period?
If the answer to all three questions is yes, the company should assume that a statutory fiscal representative is involved and should analyse payment exposure under the current CIBS or the earlier Article 289 A rules. If the answer to the first question is no, the file may concern an optional mandataire instead, with a different responsibility profile.
B. What do current CIBS rules and the case law place on the representative?
The principal text is Article L152-5 of the CIBS. It provides: “Le représentant fiscal est tenu à l’ensemble des obligations s’imposant au redevable.” The same provision then states: “Notamment, il acquitte les impositions, intérêts et pénalités exigibles”. In practical terms, the representative is not limited to forwarding a return. The statutory role can include filing, payment, rectification correspondence and the associated interest and penalties that are legally due for the represented VAT operations.
Article L152-5 also says that the representative performs the resulting formalities “au nom et pour le compte du redevable”, meaning in the name and on behalf of the taxable person. That wording is central. It gives the representative a payment and compliance duty without turning the representative into the legal taxpayer for every purpose. The foreign company remains the person whose taxable transactions are assessed. The representative’s exposure is the statutory consequence of accepting the appointment and does not become a general guarantee of the company’s commercial debts.
The official French tax administration guidance on fiscal representation explains that the representative’s role covers the French VAT operations within the representation, including operations that may not have been known when the appointment was accepted. The company should not read that as permission to leave the representative without transaction data. It means that a later discovery of an omitted operation can create a compliance and funding crisis for the representative, followed by contractual claims against the company.
The published model designation letter makes the financial risk visible. The official BOFiP model letter contains the undertaking to “acquitter solidairement, en cas de défaillance de l’entreprise représentée, la taxe afférente aux opérations imposables pour lesquelles j’ai effectué les obligations déclaratives, ainsi que les pénalités qui s’y rapportent.” The English meaning is that, if the represented business defaults, the representative undertakes to pay the tax connected with the taxable operations for which the representative performed the reporting duties and the related penalties. The exact designation and the statutory framework should be read together; a private limitation in the contract cannot by itself remove a public-law duty imposed by the tax code.
The Conseil d’État established the basic division in decision no. 304672 of 24 July 2009. The court held that the foreign business “demeure l’unique redevable de la taxe sur la valeur ajoutée”, meaning that it remains the sole person liable for VAT as a tax matter. At the same time, the representative must pay the tax due on the returns and on later reassessments, and the tax administration can conduct the audit, reassessment and penalty procedures with the representative for the French operations. The court also described a dispute about whether the representative breached its mandate as “un litige … entre le redevable de la taxe et son représentant fiscal”, a private-law dispute between the company and its representative.
That decision produces two simultaneous consequences:
- The company cannot argue that the representative’s involvement removes the company’s status as VAT taxpayer.
- The representative cannot assume that the company’s status as taxpayer eliminates the representative’s payment and procedural exposure.
The distinction was applied recently by the Paris Administrative Court of Appeal in decision no. 24PA01883 of 1 December 2025. The case concerned a Hong Kong company and VAT arrears for operations covered by the former Article 289 A regime. The court confirmed that the representative had to pay the relevant tax, including reassessments, even though the foreign company remained the taxpayer. The judgment states that this remains so “alors même que la personne établie hors de France demeure l’unique redevable de la taxe”. It also confirms that the administration may conduct “les procédures de contrôle et de redressement des déclarations” with the representative.
The same judgment gives an important warning about corporate housekeeping. The foreign company’s deletion from the French Trade and Companies Register did not automatically terminate the fiscal representation where the accreditation and consent remained in place. A company cannot treat a Kbis update, a director’s resignation or the closure of an office as proof that the representative’s tax obligations ended on that date. The termination notice, its receipt by the tax administration, the replacement appointment and the last covered operation must all be documented.
The representative’s exposure is not unlimited. In the Paris case, the court distinguished the foreign company’s role as the unique VAT taxpayer from the representative’s statutory obligations. A notice may be addressed to the representative for the French operations while the assessment remains in the foreign company’s name. A representative should therefore read the legal addressee, the service address, the tax period and the nature of the claimed amount before deciding whether to pay, contest or seek contractual security.
The boundary with French corporate income tax is equally important. In Conseil d’État decision no. 456212 of 3 February 2023, the court examined a representative or agent appointed for European Union VAT formalities. The relevant rule described the agent as acting “sous la responsabilité exclusive de leur mandant”, under the exclusive responsibility of the principal, and the court held that the VAT mandate did not automatically extend to other taxes. A VAT representative is not therefore a universal recipient for French corporate income tax, withholding tax or every audit notice. A notice relating to corporate income tax must be served and challenged under the rules applicable to that tax and to the company’s actual status in France.
This boundary does not mean that a person can never receive an income-tax notice. The Conseil d’État’s decision also shows that a person who goes beyond a limited VAT role and acts as a de facto manager, controls the company’s French activity or has authority to bind it may be treated differently. The facts must be proved. The tax administration cannot infer a complete corporate-tax mandate from the mere existence of a VAT representative, and the company should not conceal management powers behind a narrow label when the representative actually runs the French business.
A useful exposure map is the following:
| Item | Usual legal position | Immediate question |
|---|---|---|
| Unpaid VAT for covered French operations | Representative may have to pay under the statutory representation rules | Was the operation within the appointment and was the company the VAT debtor? |
| Interest on late payment | May be included among the amounts to be paid under the CIBS framework | What tax period and calculation appear on the statement? |
| VAT-related penalties | May follow the represented reporting and payment obligations | Is the penalty linked to the represented VAT operations and properly notified? |
| French corporate income tax | Not automatically within a VAT appointment | Who was the legal addressee and what management facts exist? |
| A customer’s reverse-charged VAT | Often due by the customer rather than the foreign supplier | Does the invoice and transaction place the VAT debt on the customer? |
| Contractual indemnity | A private claim against the foreign company | Does the company have funds and can the indemnity be enforced? |
The representative should never answer a payment demand with a single sentence saying “the company is the taxpayer”. That statement is incomplete. The better response identifies the statutory VAT exposure, preserves the right to challenge an incorrect assessment, requests funds or security from the company, and separately protects the representative’s contractual recovery rights.
II. How can the company or representative challenge, contain and recover the VAT debt?
A. Which notices, evidence and procedural deadlines matter?
The first action after receiving a French tax document is to classify it. A request for information, a notice of audit, a proposal for reassessment, an assessment notice, a payment demand and a collection measure do not have the same purpose or deadline. The representative’s address may be used for service, but the document may still identify the foreign company as the taxpayer. The file should be scanned in full and preserved with the envelope, electronic delivery record, attachments and the date on which the representative actually received it.
The notice should be checked against five points: the legal name of the company; the VAT number and, where relevant, the French SIREN identification number; the tax periods; the operations and returns concerned; and the amount split between principal VAT, interest and penalties. SIREN is the nine-digit French business identification number. It should not be confused with a VAT number, a Kbis or a bank reference. If the tax office has addressed a VAT proposal to a representative but describes corporate income tax, payroll or another tax, that mismatch may be decisive.
For an on-site or accounting audit, Article L13 of the French Tax Procedures Code sets the framework for checking accounting records. The audit can involve the company’s French premises and, by agreement, other locations. A representative should not assume that holding the returns makes the representative the business being audited. The company’s books, invoices, payment trail and commercial evidence remain essential. If the French administration suspects a transfer of profits within a group, Article L13 B of the same code may lead to a request for information about an indirect transfer of profits. That is a separate issue from the representative’s ordinary VAT reporting duty.
The audit notice must respect the safeguards in Article L47 of the French Tax Procedures Code. The official wording says: “Cet avis doit préciser les années soumises à vérification et mentionner expressément … que le contribuable a la faculté de se faire assister par un conseil de son choix.” In English, the notice must identify the years under review and state the right to be assisted by counsel. The company and the representative should verify whether the notice names the correct taxpayer, representative address and tax periods before the first meeting.
The reassessment proposal has a different function. Article L57 of the French Tax Procedures Code requires a proposal “motivée de manière à lui permettre de formuler ses observations ou de faire connaître son acceptation”. The reasons must be sufficient to allow the taxpayer to respond or accept. The reply should address the calculation, legal basis, factual assumptions, invoices, customer status, place of supply, reverse-charge treatment, payment evidence and any limitation or period issue. A general denial is rarely enough where the administration has identified specific transactions.
The ordinary response period shown in the proposal is commonly 30 days, and an extension may be available when requested in time under the applicable procedural rules. The representative should not wait for the foreign company’s internal approval if the deadline is running. A protective response can reserve points while requesting the missing documents, but it should not falsely certify facts that the representative cannot verify. If the company cannot provide a reliable transaction ledger, that failure should be recorded and escalated immediately.
Third-party information deserves close attention. Article L76 B of the French Tax Procedures Code states that the administration must inform the taxpayer of “la teneur et de l’origine des renseignements et documents obtenus de tiers” on which it relied. The taxpayer can request copies before collection. This can matter where the reassessment relies on marketplace data, payment processors, customs records, customer statements, bank information or a group company’s documents. The representative should ask for the source and content of the material, test it against the company’s ledger and identify whether the data covers the same period and taxable operations.
If disagreement continues, Article L59 of the French Tax Procedures Code provides for the relevant administrative commission route in cases that meet its conditions. The commission is not a substitute for a timely response to the proposal. Nor does a commission request by itself fund the representative’s immediate payment obligation. The file should distinguish discussion of the merits from measures that suspend or defer collection.
The representative may also consider a payment-deferral request. Article L277 of the French Tax Procedures Code provides that a taxpayer challenging the basis or amount of an assessment may defer payment of the disputed part when the request is expressly made in the claim and the amount or bases of the requested relief are specified. The provision states: “Le contribuable qui conteste le bien-fondé ou le montant des impositions mises à sa charge est autorisé … à différer le paiement de la partie contestée”. Guarantees may be required. A representative should not stop paying unilaterally and assume that an objection suspends collection.
The case law confirms the need for a disciplined sequence. In Conseil d’État decision no. 453241 of 13 October 2021, the court treated the possibility of a second interlocutor as a substantial procedural guarantee during the phase ending with the reassessment proposal. If the company and representative disagree with the tax office, they should use the available meeting, written-observation and interlocutor channels while the matter remains at the correct procedural stage.
A practical first-response timetable is:
- Within 24 hours, preserve the notice, confirm the service date, identify the taxpayer, tax, periods and requested payment, and tell the foreign company that funds and documents are required.
- Within seven days, reconcile every challenged transaction with the invoice, contract, customer location, VAT treatment, return line, bank payment and supporting logistics evidence.
- Before the response deadline, send a reasoned response or a carefully framed protective response, request third-party documents under Article L76 B where relevant, and decide whether an interlocutor or commission route is appropriate.
- Before collection, separate undisputed amounts from disputed amounts, consider a payment-deferral request under Article L277, and obtain written confirmation of any payment arrangement.
- After payment or resolution, preserve the final assessment, the payment proof, the correspondence and the contractual recovery file for the statutory retention period and for any later audit.
The representative should also check whether the notice was sent to a valid address and whether the administration treated the representative as a procedural recipient or as a legal debtor. The Paris Administrative Court of Appeal’s decision no. 24PA01883 shows why this distinction cannot be left to assumptions: the proposal can be validly handled with the representative while the foreign company remains the taxpayer, and the final assessment may still need to be in the foreign company’s name.
B. What should the appointment contract and compliance file contain?
A foreign company should treat fiscal representation as a funded compliance function. The appointment contract and the statutory designation should be kept in separate but cross-referenced files. The contract governs the private relationship; the designation and tax code govern the relationship with the French administration. The contract cannot make a statutory tax obligation disappear, but it can determine whether the representative can obtain funds, documents and indemnity from the company.
The appointment file should contain, at minimum:
- the foreign company’s certificate of incorporation, registered address, tax identification and beneficial ownership information;
- the representative’s corporate extract, VAT identification and accreditation evidence;
- the signed designation and acceptance, including the effective date, covered operations, service address and termination mechanics;
- the analysis showing why fiscal representation is mandatory or why an optional mandataire is sufficient;
- the identity of the responsible contact at the SIE, meaning the Service des impôts des entreprises, the local business tax office, or at the DINR, meaning the Direction des impôts des non-résidents, the non-resident tax directorate;
- the current French VAT registration, return calendar and payment instructions; and
- a written matrix assigning responsibility for invoices, returns, imports, customer-status checks, payment approval and tax correspondence.
The transaction file should then be updated every filing period. It should include the sales ledger, purchase ledger, invoices, contracts, proof of customer establishment, reverse-charge wording, import and shipping evidence, marketplace reports, payment processor statements, bank statements, VAT return working papers and proof of each payment. For French VAT returns, the CA3 is the standard VAT return form used by many taxable businesses. The company should explain the form and its reporting data to the representative rather than sending only a final number without a reconciliation.
The representative should require an accessible data room and a named company officer with authority to answer questions. A foreign company that changes its bank, payment processor, marketplace account or logistics provider without informing the representative can create an unexplained difference between commercial revenue and VAT reported in France. The contract should require advance notice of new products, new customer profiles, new storage locations, imports, samples, returns, discounts, intercompany charges and changes in the company’s establishment status.
Financial security is equally important. A sound contract can require a rolling advance, a reserve, a minimum balance, a right to suspend new filings when legally possible, reimbursement of professional fees, and an indemnity for tax, interest, penalties and collection costs that arise from the company’s missing or inaccurate data. The representative should check whether the indemnity is enforceable against the foreign company, whether there is a French guarantor, whether insurance responds, and whether the company has assets in a jurisdiction where a judgment or payment claim can realistically be enforced.
The contract should also state who owns the records, how long they are retained, how an audit is supported, who may communicate with the tax authority, how confidential information is protected, and what happens at termination. A replacement representative should be appointed before the outgoing representative’s last filing or before the next taxable operation requiring representation. The outgoing representative should not simply close an email account and assume the mandate has ended.
The current BOFiP guidance explains that a representative who renounces the appointment should notify both the represented company and the tax administration. If a signed acknowledgement cannot be obtained, the guidance refers to reliable proof of notification, such as registered mail or a bailiff’s service. The effective date cannot be treated as earlier than the notification to the administration. The file should therefore contain the renunciation letter, delivery proof, the SIE or DINR transmission, the proposed replacement appointment and the last return covered.
The company should ask a departing representative for a written reconciliation: returns filed, amounts paid, amounts outstanding, notices received, disputes pending, documents missing, customer VAT questions, open refunds and the cash reserve held. A replacement should independently verify that reconciliation. A VAT number does not automatically disappear merely because a representative resigns, and the company should not continue French transactions on the assumption that a replacement will cure an unreported gap retrospectively.
The distinction between VAT representation and other French obligations must remain visible in the handover. A VAT representative may have no authority over payroll declarations to URSSAF, the French social-security collection body, or over a corporate-income-tax return. If the company has a French subsidiary, branch or permanent establishment, the representative’s file should be compared with the corporate tax, payroll, customs and registration files rather than treated as a complete compliance audit.
Where the tax administration asks for group information, the foreign company should keep a separate analysis of transfer pricing, management services and financing. Article L13 B of the French Tax Procedures Code concerns information where the administration has indications of an indirect transfer of profits. That provision does not turn every VAT representative into the company’s income-tax manager, but it can create a document request that must be coordinated with the company’s tax advisers.
Before signing, the representative and company should answer the following questions in writing:
- Which exact taxable operations create a French VAT debt, and which operations are reverse-charged to the customer?
- Is the appointment mandatory under the current CIBS rule, or is an optional mandataire being used?
- What are the representative’s accreditation, financial-security and payment-funding arrangements?
- Who must deliver the data for each CA3 return, and how many business days are allowed for review?
- What happens if the company fails to pre-fund VAT, interest or penalties?
- Who replies to a proposal, requests third-party evidence and attends a tax meeting?
- How will the appointment be ended and replaced without an uncovered filing period?
- Where will the company enforce an indemnity if the representative has paid the French tax debt?
These questions turn the appointment from a nominal registration step into a controlled process. They also create the evidence needed if the representative later argues that the company failed to provide information or funds. Under the Conseil d’État’s decision no. 304672, that contractual dispute belongs between the company and its representative. It does not, by itself, prevent the French tax administration from applying the statutory VAT rules to the representative.
Conclusion
A French VAT representative can be required to pay unpaid VAT, interest and related penalties for the represented French operations, even though the foreign company remains the legal VAT taxpayer. That is the central distinction confirmed by current CIBS Article L152-5, the earlier Article 289 A case law and the recent Paris decision no. 24PA01883. The exposure is not a general guarantee for every French tax or company debt: a VAT mandate does not automatically cover corporate income tax, and a reverse-charged transaction may place the VAT on the French customer.
The correct response is an evidence-led review of the appointment, the relevant taxable operations, the notice, the tax period, the calculation and the available procedural deadlines. The representative should protect the response rights while obtaining funds and documents from the foreign company. The company should preserve a complete transaction file, maintain a funded reserve, and arrange replacement and handover before a resignation creates a filing gap. The contract can support recovery, but it cannot remove a statutory duty owed to the French tax administration.
Need a quick opinion on your case
A telephone consultation can be arranged within 48 hours with a lawyer from our firm.
We can review the appointment, the VAT notices, the payment record and the evidence before the next deadline.