Many British pensioners living in France are surprised to see French social charges deducted from a UK State Pension, an occupational pension or a personal pension. The abbreviations are unfamiliar: the contribution sociale généralisée (CSG) is the general social contribution, the contribution au remboursement de la dette sociale (CRDS) finances the repayment of France’s social-security debt, and the contribution additionnelle de solidarité pour l’autonomie (CASA) contributes to care for older and disabled people. A deduction from a UK pension is not automatically lawful, but a British passport, a UK bank account or payment by a UK pension provider does not by itself create an exemption.

The decisive questions are usually separate from the income-tax question. Are you tax-resident in France? Are you financially attached to a French compulsory health-insurance scheme, or is your healthcare funded by the United Kingdom under a registered S1? What kind of pension is being paid? Has the pension been included in the UK tax base so that the France–UK treaty can support a credit? Finally, was the charge assessed under the correct rate and within the correct period?

This article sets out the legal test, the 2026 rates, the effect of an S1, the distinction between a private and a government-service pension, and the evidence needed to seek an exemption or restitution. It also explains why the French Brexit guidance on social charges on property income must not be copied mechanically onto pension income.

I. When does France charge CSG and CRDS on a UK pension?

A. Which residence and healthcare test applies to a British pensioner?

The starting point is not the country from which the money is transferred. It is the category of income and the person’s connection with French health insurance. Article L. 136-1 of the French Social Security Code places replacement income within the CSG regime when the statutory conditions are met. The operative text states: « Il est institué une contribution sociale sur les revenus d’activité et sur les revenus de remplacement à laquelle sont assujettis : 1° Les personnes physiques qui sont à la fois considérées comme domiciliées en France pour l’établissement de l’impôt sur le revenu et à la charge, à quelque titre que ce soit, d’un régime obligatoire français d’assurance maladie ; ». The full provision is available in Article L. 136-1 of the French Social Security Code.

This creates two cumulative questions:

• Are you considered domiciled in France for French income-tax purposes?
• Are you, in any capacity, financially at the charge of a French compulsory health-insurance scheme?

Both limbs matter. A long-stay visa, a Withdrawal Agreement residence card, a French home or a French tax number may indicate that you are living or taxable in France, but none of those facts alone answers the health-insurance limb. Conversely, a person who is not tax-resident in France is not dealt with in the same way as a French resident, even if a French pension or another French payment is involved. Nationality is not the statutory test.

The French tax administration’s own explanation of foreign-source retirement pensions confirms this method. The official BOFiP document asks about a person who has a French tax domicile, is covered by a compulsory health-insurance scheme in France and also receives a French pension. It concludes: « L’assujettissement aux contributions sociales des pensions de retraite est donc subordonné à un double critère, tenant, d’une part, à la domiciliation fiscale en France et, d’autre part, à l’affiliation en matière de sécurité sociale. » Read the official clarification in BOFiP, foreign-source retirement pensions and social contributions. For the wider residence, declaration and treaty framework, see the related guide to UK pensions in France after Brexit.

That is why the following situations can produce different answers for two British couples living in the same French village:

• A retired person receives only UK pensions and has a properly registered UK S1. The United Kingdom may remain responsible for funding the person’s healthcare in France, subject to the individual’s entitlement and registration. This is a strong fact in a claim that the person is not at the charge of a French compulsory scheme.
• A person receives a UK pension but works in France, is self-employed in France, or is otherwise affiliated to French compulsory health insurance. That French affiliation can change the result, even if the pension itself is paid by the United Kingdom.
• A person holds a GHIC or EHIC for temporary treatment but has no pensioner S1. A card used for temporary stays is not the same evidence as an S1 registered with the local caisse primaire d’assurance maladie (CPAM), the local French health-insurance office.
• A person has a French pension as well as UK pension income. The presence of a French pension is not a complete answer in every factual configuration, but it is a warning that the French health-insurance analysis must be documented rather than assumed.

The official GOV.UK guidance on healthcare in France states that a person resident in France and receiving a UK State Pension or another qualifying exportable benefit may be entitled to UK-funded healthcare, and that the S1 must be registered with the local CPAM. Once registered, the holder and eligible dependants receive healthcare in France on the same basis as a French citizen. That healthcare entitlement and the social-charge consequence are closely connected, but the tax claim still requires proof of the actual status for the relevant years.

The S1 should therefore be treated as an evidential document, not as a slogan. The file should show who issued it, the period covered, the date of registration, the CPAM acknowledgement and whether a different French affiliation began later. If the S1 was issued after the French charges were assessed, the claimant should explain whether it confirms a pre-existing entitlement or only starts from the date of issue. A later document may be persuasive, but it cannot automatically rewrite every earlier year without a factual and legal explanation.

A further distinction is essential after Brexit. The French government’s official Brexit tax FAQ discusses an exemption from CSG and CRDS for certain UK-affiliated persons on French-source property income, while retaining a 7.5% solidarity levy on that property income. That page concerns the provisions governing income from property and investment income. It should not be transposed to pension income, which is governed by the replacement-income provisions of the Social Security Code. A British owner who has obtained relief on rental income or a property gain has not thereby proved that the same relief applies to a UK pension.

The practical first conclusion is therefore narrow but useful: if you are French tax-resident and genuinely at the charge of the French compulsory health-insurance system, UK origin does not by itself remove CSG, CRDS or CASA. If you are French tax-resident but healthcare remains legally funded by the United Kingdom and the S1 evidence is complete, there may be a route to exemption and recovery. The exact pension type and the assessment route must then be checked.

B. How do the UK-France tax treaty and the pension category alter the result?

Social charges and income tax must be analysed in parallel, not confused. The 2008 UK–France Double Taxation Convention contains a pensions article and a government-service article. Article 18 provides that pensions and similar remuneration for past employment are taxable only in the state of residence, subject to Article 19. Article 19 contains special rules for pensions paid by, or from funds created by, a state or local authority for government service. The pension provider’s label is not enough: the legal origin of the pension, the service that generated it and any exception in the treaty must be identified.

For a typical UK private pension or State Pension, Article 18 is the starting point for income tax. France may be the country entitled to tax the pension as the resident state. The French tax administration’s pension guidance advises a taxpayer to establish whether the payment is a private, social-security or public pension and then consult the treaty or Form 2041-E. The current 2026 Form 2041-E is the practical declaration document for relevant international pension situations.

That allocation of income tax does not automatically erase French social charges. CSG and CRDS are linked to the French social-security rules and, in some cases, are treated as part of the “French tax” for treaty-credit purposes. The Conseil d’État gave an important answer in an official opinion concerning the France–UK Convention: Conseil d’État, 9th and 10th chambers reunited, 12 February 2020, no. 435907. The case concerned French residents and UK-source income; it is not a blanket pension exemption, but it is directly relevant to the treaty-credit analysis.

The Conseil d’État held that the French contributions were within the treaty’s French-tax definition and stated: « En revanche, cette condition n’exige pas que les revenus en cause aient été soumis à une imposition effective. » It also held that the relevant income must be included in the base of a UK tax covered by the Convention, without requiring that UK tax was actually paid after allowances or other relief. The decision’s operative guidance is that evidence of inclusion in the UK tax base may matter even where the UK calculation ends with no tax payable.

That route is different from an S1 exemption. A treaty credit generally assumes that French contributions are otherwise chargeable and asks whether a credit can offset the French tax attributable to the relevant income. An S1-based argument says that the French social-charge conditions are not met because the person is not at the charge of a French compulsory health-insurance scheme. One route seeks not to owe the charge; the other accepts the assessment provisionally but seeks relief through the treaty mechanism. A claim should present them in the correct order and with the correct evidence.

The distinction is particularly important for government-service pensions. If a former UK civil servant, police officer, teacher or armed-forces member receives a pension falling within Article 19, the income-tax taxing right may remain with the United Kingdom, subject to the treaty’s nationality and other conditions. The fact that France does not tax the pension as ordinary income does not automatically determine CSG or CRDS. However, evidence that the pension was included in the UK tax base can be central to a treaty-credit claim under Article 24. The GOV.UK guidance on tax when living abroad likewise warns that the country of residence and the UK may both appear in the analysis and directs the taxpayer to the applicable treaty.

The French courts have repeatedly warned that foreign source is not an automatic defence. In Conseil d’État, 8th and 3rd chambers reunited, 25 October 2024, no. 473997, concerning Swiss pension income, the court considered the coordination of social-security legislation and stated that the relevant rules do not prevent the competent state from assessing contributions on the total pensions received from two or more states in the circumstances examined. The decision is not a UK judgment and must not be presented as one. It is useful because it shows why a claimant must establish the applicable healthcare legislation and cannot rely only on the foreign bank statement.

The follow-up judgment, CAA Lyon, 5th chamber, 13 August 2025, no. 24LY03019, rejected the claim after remittal and examined whether the claimant was subject to French legislation because she resided in France, received a French pension and benefited from French social-security services. A later illustrative decision, CAA Nancy, 2nd chamber, 29 January 2026, no. 24NC00714, likewise dealt with Swiss replacement income and the need to prove the relevant foreign affiliation and prior contributions. These cases do not decide the position of every British pensioner; they show the evidential discipline expected when foreign pensions and social contributions meet.

There is also a rate question. Under the current wording of Article L. 136-8 of the Social Security Code, « Sont assujetties à la contribution au taux de 8,3 % les pensions de retraite, et les pensions d’invalidité. » That is the normal CSG rate when the relevant income and household thresholds are met. The statute also creates reduced rates, and the official 2026 public-service table applies the household’s revenu fiscal de référence (RFR), meaning the reference tax income, and the number of tax shares.

For 2026, the official table uses the 2024 RFR shown on the 2025 tax notice. For one tax share, the published bands are: up to €13,048 for the zero rate; €13,049 to €17,057 for the reduced CSG rate; €17,058 to €26,472 for the median rate; and above €26,472 for the normal rate. The exact table must be checked for the household’s number of shares and overseas department. The Service-Public pension table also records the practical transition rule: moving from the reduced rate to a higher rate can depend on exceeding the relevant ceiling for two consecutive years.

The four outcomes for a pension subject to the French regime are normally described as follows:

CSG position	CSG	CRDS	CASA	Combined total
Zero rate	Exempt	Exempt	Exempt	0%
Reduced	3.8%	0.5%	Exempt	4.3%
Median	6.6%	0.5%	0.3%	7.4%
Normal	8.3%	0.5%	0.3%	9.1%

CRDS is governed by Article 14 of Ordinance no. 96-50 of 24 January 1996, which makes the contribution apply to the relevant activity and replacement income of persons covered by the Social Security Code. Its rate is set by Article 19 of the same Ordinance: « Le taux des contributions instituées par les articles 14 à 17 est fixé à 0,5 %. » CASA is a separate contribution. Article L. 137-41 of the Social Security Code states: « Est instituée une contribution additionnelle de solidarité pour l’autonomie au taux de 0,3 %, assise sur les avantages de retraite et d’invalidité ainsi que sur les allocations de préretraite qui ne sont pas assujettis aux prélèvements mentionnés à l’article 235 ter du code général des impôts et qui sont perçus par les personnes physiques désignées à l’article L. 136-1 du présent code. » It also excludes pensions below the statutory income thresholds.

The charge can therefore be wrong in at least four different ways: the person may not be at the charge of French health insurance; the charge may have been calculated at the wrong RFR rate; the pension may have been classified incorrectly; or a treaty credit may have been ignored. Each error requires different documents and different wording in the claim.

II. How can you stop or recover the charges?

A. Which documents and steps support an exemption or tax credit?

The strongest claim is built year by year. A general statement that “I have an S1” or “my pension is British” is unlikely to be enough when the administration has already issued a tax notice. Prepare a schedule with one line for each pension, each payer and each tax year. Show the gross amount, currency conversion used for the French return, the French amount assessed, the contribution lines, any UK withholding and the legal basis of the relief requested.

The first document set concerns French tax residence:

• French tax notices for the relevant years, including the RFR and the number of tax shares;
• the date on which the household moved to France and any split-year or departure evidence;
• the address and tax-household position for each year;
• the French income-tax returns and international pension schedules, including Form 2041-E where used;
• evidence of any UK return or HMRC statement showing how the pension was reported in the United Kingdom.

The second set concerns healthcare affiliation. Request or locate:

• the UK-issued S1 and the letter or certificate showing its registration with the French CPAM;
• the start and end dates of S1 entitlement and documents relating to renewal or replacement;
• the attestation de droits, the French certificate confirming health-insurance entitlement, and any CPAM correspondence;
• evidence of French employment, self-employment, a French pension or another affiliation that might make the French scheme competent;
• documents showing whether a dependant’s position was different from the pensioner’s position.

Do not rely on private medical insurance as a substitute for the legal analysis. Private cover may satisfy an immigration or practical healthcare need, but it does not automatically establish that the person is outside the French compulsory scheme for CSG purposes. Similarly, holding a French carte vitale, the French health-insurance card, proves access to healthcare but does not on its own identify which state bears the cost under the relevant coordination rules.

The third set concerns the pension’s legal classification. Ask every provider for a written description, not merely a payslip. The request should identify whether the payment is:

• the UK State Pension or another statutory social-security pension;
• a private occupational pension, workplace pension or personal pension;
• a public-service pension paid for employment by the UK government, a local authority or a statutory body;
• a lump sum, drawdown, annuity, survivor’s pension, injury benefit or another payment that may have different treaty and domestic treatment.

This classification is not academic. Article 18 of the Convention generally directs private past-employment pensions to the state of residence, while Article 19 may reserve certain government-service pensions to the paying state. A QROPS transfer is another separate issue: a transfer or lump sum may not be treated like an ordinary periodic pension. The present claim should not mix a pension payment with a pension transfer or with UK PAYE relief without identifying the exact payment.

For an S1-based claim, the central request should be framed around the statutory condition in Article L. 136-1: the taxpayer accepts French tax residence if that is correct, but disputes that he or she was at the charge of a French compulsory health-insurance scheme for the years claimed. Attach the S1 evidence and ask for cancellation or restitution of the CSG, CRDS and, where included, CASA. If only part of the year is covered, state the precise months and explain any change in affiliation.

For a low-income claim, calculate the RFR and tax-share position against the official year-specific table. Do not use the pension amount alone. The relevant household income can include other income, and the applicable reference year may be the year stated by the current Service-Public table. If the administration moved the household to a higher rate after one unusually high year, check whether the two-year transition rule was respected. Ask for the assessment to be recalculated even if no full S1 exemption is available.

For a treaty-credit claim, prove that the relevant income was within the base of one of the UK taxes covered by the Convention. A UK tax return, HMRC calculation, pension statement showing taxable income, P60 or an official provider letter may help, but the document should match the exact pension and year. The Conseil d’État’s opinion in no. 435907 is important because it stated that effective UK tax payment is not necessarily required; inclusion in the UK tax base can be the relevant fact. That does not remove the need to show that the pension falls within the treaty article relied on.

The credit should be calculated rather than asserted. Identify the French social contributions on the pension, the French tax attributable to the income under the treaty method and any limit that applies. If the French tax attributable to that income is lower than the amount claimed, the credit cannot be assumed to exceed the treaty ceiling. If the pension is taxable only in France under Article 18, a UK tax-base argument may not be available in the same way as for income covered by a UK taxing right. This is a point where the classification letter and the treaty article must agree.

The collection route also matters. Article L. 136-5 of the Social Security Code says of foreign-source income that the contributions « sont établies, recouvrées et contrôlées dans les conditions et selon les modalités prévues au III de l’article L. 136-6 du présent code. » See Article L. 136-5 of the Social Security Code. In practical terms, a charge shown through the French tax administration on foreign pension income is not handled like a UK payroll error. A deduction from a French pension payslip may require contact with the pension body as well as a tax claim. A UK PAYE deduction is a separate HMRC matter.

The letter to the French tax administration should be precise:

1. identify the tax year, notice number, taxpayer number and each pension;
2. state whether the primary request is exemption, correction of the rate, treaty credit or restitution;
3. quote the relevant domestic provision and identify the supporting treaty article;
4. attach the S1 and CPAM evidence, or the UK tax-base evidence, in chronological order;
5. show the calculation in a table and specify the amount requested;
6. ask for a written decision and preserve proof of filing.

If the issue concerns current deductions, request prospective correction as well as recovery of prior years. Stopping a future deduction does not automatically refund earlier amounts. Conversely, a refund of one year does not prove that every subsequent year has the same healthcare or RFR position.

An English-language explanation can accompany the French legal terms, but the administration should receive the key request in clear French or through the secure French tax messaging system with the relevant French labels. Use “CSG”, “CRDS”, “CASA”, “pension de source étrangère”, “régime obligatoire français d’assurance maladie”, “réclamation contentieuse” and “dégrèvement” consistently. A short bilingual schedule reduces the risk that a claim about social contributions is mistaken for a claim about UK income-tax withholding.

B. What remedy and deadline apply when French charges were wrongly collected?

The normal remedy is a formal tax claim, known in French as a réclamation contentieuse. It should be filed with the service identified on the French tax notice or through the taxpayer’s secure online account. The claim should request a dégrèvement, meaning cancellation or reduction of the assessment, and restitution of amounts already paid. If the charges were withheld by a pension body rather than assessed on a tax notice, the correspondence should identify the paying body and ask which channel it requires for correction, while preserving a parallel tax file where the foreign pension was included in a French assessment.

Article L. 190 of the French Tax Procedure Book expressly covers claims seeking discharge, reduction or repayment of undue assessments. The text states: « Sont instruites et jugées selon les règles du présent chapitre toutes actions tendant à la décharge ou à la réduction d’une imposition ou à l’exercice de droits à déduction ou à la restitution d’impositions indues, fondées sur la non-conformité de la règle de droit dont il a été fait application à une règle de droit supérieure, révélée par une décision juridictionnelle ou par un avis rendu au contentieux. » This gives a legal framework for a claim based on a superior rule, but most S1 and rate disputes are first presented as an application of the statute to the taxpayer’s facts.

The general time rule must be checked against the way the amount was collected. Article R196-1 of the Tax Procedure Book states: « Pour être recevables, les réclamations relatives aux impôts autres que les impôts directs locaux et les taxes annexes à ces impôts, doivent être présentées à l’administration au plus tard le 31 décembre de la deuxième année suivant celle, selon le cas : » See the official Article R196-1 and read the paragraphs that follow for an assessment, a payment without a tax roll, or an event forming the basis of the claim. Do not calculate the deadline by simply counting two calendar years from the date of the first pension statement. Identify the date of the tax assessment, payment or withholding mechanism first.

For a payment made without an assessment, the starting event can be different from a formal notice. For a claim based on a court decision or a superior-law issue, Article L. 190 contains additional wording and a two-year prescription in the situations it describes. The safe practice is to file as soon as the error is identified, include every still-open year and expressly reserve the position for any year whose date requires further review. Waiting for the next annual tax return can forfeit a year.

The claim should also address jurisdiction and terminology. Older litigation sometimes distinguished between CSG on activity or replacement income and CSG on property or investment income. The court’s jurisdiction and the administrative route depend on the legal base of the charge and on the legislation applicable in the relevant year. This is another reason not to copy a property-income refund letter into a UK pension case. State whether the charge relates to a pension, a property gain, rental income or investment income, and attach the relevant notice line.

The case law provides both an argument and a warning. In the UK treaty opinion, CE no. 435907 recognised that French social contributions appear within the Convention’s French-tax definition for the credit analysis, and that actual UK tax payment is not the only relevant proof. That may assist a claimant whose UK pension is included in a covered UK tax base. It does not establish that every British pensioner is entitled to a refund, and it does not replace proof of the pension’s treaty category.

In the foreign-pension decisions, the courts focused on evidence of the applicable social-security legislation. CAA Nancy, 19 October 2017, no. 16NC01190, examined Swiss pension income, French affiliation and the alleged principle against double social contributions. The court noted that the claimant had not established the relevant Swiss affiliation and rejected the challenge on the facts. The later CE no. 473997 and CAA Lyon no. 24LY03019 show why a pension claimant must distinguish a foreign pension’s source from the state legally responsible for health cover. Those decisions are not British pension decisions, but their evidential lesson is directly useful.

A claim should not overstate the effect of Brexit. The Withdrawal Agreement and the social-security arrangements can preserve rights for certain people who were already in a protected situation, while the Trade and Cooperation Agreement and domestic rules may apply to later movers differently. The answer can turn on the date residence began, the date the pension became payable, the S1 entitlement, the claimant’s work status and the period of healthcare registration. A British national who moved to France in 2018, a person who moved in 2022 and a person who works in France may not have the same legal file.

Nor should a claimant assume that an exemption from CSG and CRDS means every French deduction disappears. CASA, income tax, French health-insurance contributions of another kind, UK PAYE and private insurance premiums can have separate legal bases. Article L. 137-41 has its own income thresholds and exclusions. A successful CSG argument should therefore state whether CRDS and CASA follow from the same factual defect, and the request should seek each charge separately rather than use the phrase “social charges” without a calculation.

The same care is needed for low-income relief. A household may have a zero CSG rate but a different result if its reference income changes, if the number of tax shares changes, or if the rate transition rule is applied. Ask the administration to identify the RFR and tax-share calculation used. If the figure is wrong, challenge the underlying assessment, not only the percentage printed on the pension statement.

If the administration rejects the claim, request the grounds and preserve the notification date. The next remedy depends on the nature of the decision and the court competent for the contribution. A lawyer can then examine whether the dispute concerns a factual S1 issue, a treaty interpretation, an incorrect rate, a time-limit problem or a procedural defect. The file should contain the original claim, exhibits, delivery proof and the administration’s response; without that chronology, a later appeal becomes unnecessarily difficult.

For a British resident in Paris or elsewhere in France, the practical sequence remains the same:

• separate pension income from property and investment income;
• establish French tax residence for every year;
• prove the state responsible for compulsory healthcare, with S1 and CPAM documents where relevant;
• classify each UK pension under the treaty;
• check the 2026 or relevant-year RFR rate and the CSG, CRDS and CASA lines;
• test any treaty-credit route using UK tax-base evidence;
• file a documented claim before the applicable deadline;
• seek prospective correction as well as restitution.

This sequence converts a vague complaint about a reduced pension payment into an auditable legal claim. It also prevents a common error: asking France to refund UK PAYE, or asking HMRC to refund French CSG. The country that collected the money and the legal basis of the deduction must be identified before the remedy is selected.

Conclusion

A British resident in France may have a credible claim against CSG, CRDS or CASA deducted from a UK pension, but the result is fact-specific. The strongest exemption argument normally rests on the absence of French compulsory health-insurance responsibility, supported by a valid UK S1 and CPAM registration for the relevant period. A separate low-income argument may produce a zero or reduced rate. A treaty-credit argument may assist where the pension is within the France–UK Convention and the income was included in the UK tax base. None of these arguments is established by the word “British” or by the fact that the pension arrives from a UK bank.

The file should identify the pension, the treaty article, the tax year, the RFR, the healthcare state, the collection route and the deadline. It should distinguish private pensions, State Pension income and government-service pensions, and it should keep property-income exemptions separate from replacement-income rules. A formal French claim should request the exact relief sought, show the calculation and ask for both past restitution and future correction.

Need a quick opinion on your case

Telephone consultation within 48 hours with a lawyer from the firm.

We can review your S1 evidence, pension classification and French tax notices and identify the appropriate route.

+33 6 46 60 58 22 — Maître Reda Kohen

Contact the firm through the online form.