title: “Does a Foreign SaaS Company Need a French Subsidiary to Sell to French Customers? VAT, Permanent Establishment and Contract Rules”
slug: “foreign-saas-company-sell-france-french-subsidiary-vat-oss”
excerpt: “A practical legal roadmap for a foreign SaaS company selling in France: subsidiary or direct sales, VAT and OSS, permanent-establishment risk, consumer contracts and evidence.”
lang: “en”
A foreign software company can often sell a subscription to customers in France without incorporating a French subsidiary. That answer is useful, but incomplete. A SaaS launch can trigger French VAT obligations, consumer-contract rules, digital-content withdrawal exceptions, conformity duties, tax exposure through a permanent establishment, and registration or payroll issues if people begin operating locally. The decision is therefore not “French subsidiary or no French subsidiary” in the abstract. It is a structured analysis of the customer profile, the service delivered, the people and premises used in France, the contracting model, and the evidence kept for each transaction. This guide is written for a founder, board or foreign parent company preparing to sell software in France in 2026. It separates a direct cross-border model from a French branch or subsidiary, then turns the legal rules into a launch checklist. It also explains why a website, a French-language sales page or a French customer alone does not automatically create a French company, while a local team with authority to negotiate, sign or deliver the service may materially change the risk analysis.
I. Does a foreign SaaS company need a French subsidiary to sell to French customers?
A. When direct cross-border sales can work without a French company
There is no general rule requiring every foreign SaaS provider to form a French company merely because a French customer can access its platform. A company incorporated in the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Switzerland or another country may contract from its existing headquarters, host the application outside France, invoice the customer from that entity and provide support remotely. The existence of French demand is a commercial fact; it is not, by itself, proof of a French subsidiary, a branch or a permanent establishment.
That does not mean that the foreign company operates outside French law. Mandatory rules follow the transaction and the customer in a number of areas. A French consumer may benefit from French consumer protection even where the supplier is incorporated abroad. A digital service supplied to a person resident in France may be located in France for VAT purposes. A sales employee or dependent agent working habitually from France may create tax and employment exposure. A regulated activity may require a local authorization or a locally accountable operator. The correct question is therefore whether the business has built a French-facing activity that remains genuinely cross-border, or whether its operational substance has moved into France.
For a pure remote model, the foreign company should document at least five facts before launch:
- the foreign entity signs the customer agreement and receives the subscription price;
- the platform, support and decision-making functions are genuinely managed from outside France;
- no person in France habitually has authority to negotiate or conclude contracts on behalf of the foreign company;
- the VAT treatment is determined by customer status and service type, rather than by the billing address alone; and
- the website, order flow, terms and customer records identify the real contracting entity and its address.
The last point is particularly important for a start-up that markets under a brand different from its legal name. French customers should not have to guess whether they are contracting with a Delaware corporation, an English limited company, a Swiss société anonyme or a French entity. The legal notice should state the operator’s identity, address and contact details, together with the information applicable to the online activity. Article 19 of the French law on confidence in the digital economy (LCEN) requires professional online communication services to make identifying information available. A foreign company should adapt that information to its own registration system instead of copying a French SIREN, RCS or Kbis reference that it does not possess.
A Kbis is the official extract showing a French business’s registration in the commercial register. The greffe is the registry clerk’s office attached to the relevant commercial court. Neither term should appear in a foreign company’s legal notice as though the company were French when it is not. If the foreign company later creates a French establishment, the registration evidence and the information displayed on the website should be updated. That simple distinction prevents a marketing page from creating confusion over who owns the platform, who invoices, who processes a refund and who can be sued.
The contract itself can be formed electronically. The French Civil Code recognizes electronic writing and electronic signatures subject to the applicable conditions. Article 1127-1 of the Civil Code addresses the person offering goods or services electronically and the information that must be made available, while Article 1127-2 addresses the electronic contracting process and the ability to correct an order before acceptance. The SaaS order path should therefore preserve the version of the terms presented, the price, the selected plan, the acceptance event, the timestamp, the customer identity and the confirmation sent afterwards. A checkbox without an audit trail is a weak answer to a later dispute about which terms governed the subscription.
Direct sales are usually easier to defend where the customer is a business buying software for its professional activity, the foreign supplier does not employ a French sales force and the supplier does not maintain a dedicated French office or stock of equipment. The word “usually” matters. A French customer can still challenge invoicing, VAT, contract formation, data processing, service levels or termination. A B2B label also does not automatically defeat every consumer-protection rule, as the specific facts of the buyer and the transaction may matter.
For that reason, the launch file should contain a customer-classification matrix rather than a single sentence saying “B2B”. It should record whether the buyer is a taxable business, a public body, a small professional business, a consumer, or a mixed-use purchaser; whether the user is in France or elsewhere; and whether the customer buys access, downloads digital content, receives implementation work, or orders a bundle. The same foreign company can have one French VAT and contract workflow for enterprise subscriptions and another for consumer subscriptions. Treating every user as an enterprise customer is a common source of avoidable exposure.
B. When a French branch, subsidiary or local operation becomes the better structure
A French subsidiary is a separate legal person incorporated in France, often as a société par actions simplifiée (SAS) or a société à responsabilité limitée (SARL). A branch, commonly called a succursale, is a French establishment of the foreign company and does not have the same legal separation from its parent. The choice between direct sales, a branch and a subsidiary is not made by the website domain or by the nationality of the founder. It is made by the allocation of contracts, people, assets, liabilities, profits and operational authority.
A subsidiary may be appropriate when the business needs a French employer, a French bank account for local operations, a local contracting entity trusted by enterprise customers, French investors, a separately ring-fenced liability position, or a stable team responsible for sales and delivery. It may also be practical where the company wants to tender for contracts that require a French registration, invoice French public-sector customers through a local setup, or place regulated functions under a French entity. Incorporation does not erase the parent company’s tax or transfer-pricing obligations, but it can make the commercial and governance perimeter more intelligible.
A branch can be useful where the foreign parent wants a French operating presence without creating a separate shareholder-owned company. It also means that the foreign company remains directly exposed to the branch’s commitments. Direct registration, a branch and a subsidiary each have different formalities, accounts, beneficial-owner information, tax filings and closing procedures. A founder who needs only to test demand should not create a French subsidiary automatically; a founder who intends to hire, sign long-term local contracts and control French delivery should not assume that a remote foreign company remains the lowest-risk structure forever.
The strongest reasons to review the structure are operational, not cosmetic:
- a person in France regularly negotiates the commercial terms, accepts orders, signs contracts or plays the decisive role leading to their conclusion;
- the business leases or controls premises in France from which sales, implementation, support or management are carried out;
- French-based staff perform core revenue-generating or service-delivery functions rather than merely independent market research;
- the foreign entity holds French inventory, hardware or infrastructure that is more than incidental to the SaaS product;
- customers are promised a French team, French service continuity or a French contracting counterparty; or
- a sector-specific authorization, professional status or public contract requires a French operator.
These facts can create a French establishment even if the business has not voluntarily incorporated. For corporate tax, Article 209 of the French General Tax Code sets the territorial basis for taxing profits from enterprises operated in France, subject to applicable treaties. The French tax administration explains that a permanent establishment, or établissement stable, is assessed by reference to the applicable tax treaty and commonly involves a fixed place of business or a dependent agent with authority to bind the enterprise. Its official guidance on an establishment stable in France should be read with the treaty applicable to the foreign company’s residence state.
A SaaS company should not reduce the analysis to the location of its cloud provider. Renting computing capacity from an independent hosting provider is not the same fact as maintaining a place in France at the company’s disposal. Conversely, a French office occupied by the company’s sales or implementation team, coupled with authority to bind the foreign entity, deserves a careful treaty analysis. The commercial description “sales support” cannot decide the legal characterization. The actual job description, reporting lines, contract workflow, customer communications and approval practice are more persuasive.
The dependent-agent question is often underestimated. If a France-based person repeatedly presents the offer, agrees material terms and sends the foreign company only a formal approval request, the foreign company may face a permanent-establishment argument even if the signature occurs abroad. The risk increases when the person is integrated into the foreign business, works for it primarily, uses its systems, represents it to customers and has no meaningful ability to alter the outcome. An independent distributor with its own business, risk and authority may produce a different analysis, but the label in the contract is not conclusive.
Employment creates a parallel issue. Hiring the first French employee through the foreign company may be possible, but it requires a payroll and social-security design, employment-law compliance, declarations and a decision on whether an employer-of-record arrangement reflects the real relationship. URSSAF, the body responsible for collecting much of France’s social-security contributions, does not turn an employee into a subsidiary; it does make an unexamined “we will hire from abroad and deal with it later” approach dangerous. If the company’s business plan is to build a France-based team, incorporation or a documented local-establishment solution should be considered at the beginning rather than after the first payroll dispute.
The practical conclusion is not that a French subsidiary is mandatory. It is that a subsidiary becomes a sensible risk-allocation tool when the French activity has local people, premises, assets, regulated responsibilities or long-term contracting substance. Before choosing it, the parent should compare the costs of a French entity with the costs of permanent-establishment exposure, VAT registrations, payroll arrangements, local contract enforcement and customer due diligence. The existing French company-formation roadmap for foreign founders can serve as the hub for incorporation formalities; this article addresses the narrower question that comes before incorporation: whether the SaaS model actually needs it.
II. How should a foreign SaaS company sell to France without creating avoidable legal exposure?
A. How VAT and the French permanent-establishment analysis fit together
VAT and corporate tax answer different questions. VAT asks where the taxable supply is located, who the customer is, whether the supplier must collect or report tax, and which invoicing mechanism applies. Permanent-establishment analysis asks whether the foreign enterprise has a taxable business presence in France under domestic law and the relevant treaty. A company may have French VAT compliance without a corporate-tax permanent establishment. It may also have a corporate-tax issue that cannot be solved by registering for VAT. A French VAT number is not a certificate that no permanent establishment exists.
For SaaS, the first classification is the nature of the service. A standard hosted subscription is normally analyzed as an electronic service when it is essentially automated and involves minimal human intervention. Following the VAT recodification in force on 1 September 2026, Article L. 211-170 of the French Code of Taxes on Goods and Services (CIBS) describes electronically supplied services by reference to automated delivery and limited human intervention. The CIBS is the new code structure into which operative VAT provisions have been moved; a legal memo prepared from an old General Tax Code article number should therefore be checked against the current code.
The second classification is the customer. For a business customer acting as a taxable person, the starting point is the customer’s business establishment or the establishment receiving the service. Article L. 211-92 of the CIBS states the general B2B place-of-supply principle, subject to the specific rules and exceptions that must be tested against the service. The SaaS provider should collect a valid business identification number where required, verify the customer’s status, identify the establishment receiving the subscription and issue an invoice that explains the VAT treatment. A French customer’s billing address is evidence to examine, not the whole legal analysis.
For a consumer or another non-taxable person, the location of an electronic service is generally tied to the customer’s usual residence. The current CIBS section on electronically supplied services and the operative place-of-supply text for electronic services should be checked for the precise transaction and date. The consequence is practical: a foreign company selling consumer subscriptions into France may need to charge French VAT or use an applicable European reporting mechanism even though it has no French subsidiary.
The One Stop Shop (OSS) is a VAT reporting mechanism, not a French corporate vehicle. The French tax administration’s official page on registration for the VAT One Stop Shop distinguishes the Union and non-Union schemes. A foreign provider should determine whether it has an establishment inside the European Union, whether it is eligible for the Union scheme, whether it must use the non-Union scheme, and whether another VAT registration is required for supplies outside the scheme. The distinction is important for a non-EU SaaS business: the OSS can simplify declarations for eligible B2C services, but it does not file corporate-tax returns, employ staff, register a French branch or eliminate consumer-law duties.
The VAT file should preserve the evidence used to locate the customer. A subscription platform should not rely only on one self-declared country field. Depending on the product and the applicable rules, the file may contain the customer’s billing address, payment information, internet-protocol location, business identification number, address of use and customer statements. Conflicting evidence should trigger a review rather than an automatic French VAT charge or an automatic zero-rating decision. The business should also decide how it handles refunds, cancellations, credits, free trials that convert into paid plans and group-company purchases.
Invoices need a separate check. Article 289 of the General Tax Code sets core invoicing obligations, including information identifying the parties, the taxable transaction and the amounts due. A foreign invoice can be written in English, but the company should confirm the information French customers need, the currency and exchange-rate treatment where relevant, the VAT number, the reverse-charge wording where applicable, and the ability to produce a French translation or supporting explanation if the tax authority asks. The invoice should name the actual supplier; inserting “France” in a template does not move the supplier’s establishment to France.
Corporate tax follows the people and functions that generate the French business. A foreign company can have customers in France and no permanent establishment, but it should be able to explain why: who sets prices, who approves discounts, who signs, who controls the platform, who performs onboarding, who handles renewals, who bears commercial risk and where those functions take place. A short functional memo, organization chart and contract-approval log are more useful than a generic statement that the company has “no French presence”. The memo should be updated when the first French employee, office, reseller or implementation consultant is added.
Where a permanent establishment is found, the taxable profit attributed to France is not necessarily all French revenue. The analysis allocates the profit generated by the French functions and assets under domestic law and the applicable treaty, with transfer-pricing and accounting evidence. A local subsidiary is not a magic shield either: transactions between the parent and subsidiary need a coherent service, licensing or cost-sharing agreement, and the prices should reflect the functions, assets and risks actually assumed. A foreign parent charging a French subsidiary an unexplained “management fee” may create a different audit problem from the one it intended to solve.
Use this four-question VAT and tax screen before opening the French checkout:
- Is the buyer a taxable business, a public body, a small professional business or a consumer?
- Is the product an automated electronic service, a professional service with substantial human work, digital content, or a bundle?
- What evidence locates the buyer and what VAT scheme, registration or invoice treatment follows?
- Who in France negotiates, signs, delivers, supports or manages the French activity, and what treaty analysis follows?
If the answers are not stable, the company should not hide the uncertainty in a checkout setting. It should route the sale for review, adjust the contract and tax workflow, and record the basis for the decision. The point of the screen is not to force every foreign SaaS company into a French subsidiary; it is to prevent the company from using “no subsidiary” as a substitute for a VAT and permanent-establishment analysis.
B. What French SaaS contracts, consumer rights and evidence must cover
A French-facing SaaS contract should be designed around the actual product. “Access to software” may contain a recurring digital service, downloadable material, implementation services, support, data hosting, analytics, a free trial and an automatic renewal. Each element can affect the pre-contract information, price display, cancellation process, service-level promise and remedy. A short English template copied from a US website may be commercially familiar while leaving important French-law points unclear.
For consumer-facing or mixed-use sales, begin with the pre-contract information. Article L. 221-5 of the Consumer Code requires information before the consumer is bound, including information adapted to the characteristics of the service and the digital environment. The page and checkout should state the identity of the professional, the main characteristics of the service, the price and billing frequency, the duration, renewal and termination mechanics, the technical requirements, material interoperability limits where relevant, and the means of making a complaint. The legal notice, terms, order page and confirmation email should not contradict one another.
The right of withdrawal needs a product-specific flow. Under Article L. 221-18 of the Consumer Code, a consumer generally has fourteen days to withdraw from a distance contract, subject to the statutory rules and exceptions. For a recurring SaaS service, the company must distinguish a subscription service from digital content supplied immediately. It should not assume that adding a “non-refundable” sentence removes the right. The order flow should also record whether the consumer expressly requested immediate performance of a service before the withdrawal period expired.
Digital content supplied without a tangible medium has a specific exception. Article L. 221-28 of the Consumer Code includes the case where performance of digital content begins after the consumer has expressly consented and acknowledged losing the right of withdrawal, subject to the statutory conditions. The consent should be separate, intelligible and linked to the actual act of immediate delivery. A pre-ticked box, a buried sentence in general terms or a button that says only “continue” is a poor record of express consent.
The confirmation must also be durable. Article L. 221-13 of the Consumer Code addresses confirmation of the contract on a durable medium and the information associated with early performance and loss of withdrawal. The company should send the final terms, plan, price, renewal date, withdrawal information, consent record and contact route in an email or downloadable document that the customer can retain unchanged. Keeping only a mutable web page is not an adequate substitute for a durable record.
The consequences of a defective flow can be financial. Under Article L. 221-20, an omitted withdrawal disclosure can extend the withdrawal period. Under Article L. 221-26, the consumer’s payment obligation is affected where the statutory conditions for early performance or the required information are not satisfied. The exact consequence depends on the contract and the missing step, which is why the product team, lawyer and billing engineer should test the same user journey rather than review separate screenshots.
Recurring SaaS plans should be checked for renewal notices and termination. Article L. 215-1 of the Consumer Code requires written information, in clear terms, within the statutory period before the deadline for refusing tacit renewal of certain fixed-term service contracts. The renewal email should not be treated as a marketing campaign. It should identify the end date, the deadline for non-renewal and the action available to the customer. The account interface should make the termination route findable and should retain the date and result of the request.
Small professional customers deserve a specific warning. Article L. 221-3 of the Consumer Code extends certain consumer-contract provisions to some contracts between professionals where the statutory conditions are met, including the size of the business, the way it was solicited and whether the contract’s subject falls outside its main activity. A business account is not automatically an enterprise-only relationship for every purpose. In its judgment of 12 September 2018, First Civil Chamber, appeal no. 17-17.319, involving a professional customer and a website-related contract, the Court of Cassation held that the customer “bénéficie des dispositions protectrices du consommateur” under the relevant conditions. The phrase is a reminder to test the buyer’s status and the purpose of the contract, not to assume that a VAT number ends the analysis.
Digital conformity is another area where SaaS differs from a simple downloadable file. Article L. 224-25-1 of the Consumer Code defines the digital environment and interoperability concepts used by the digital-content and digital-service regime. Article L. 224-25-12 addresses conformity for digital content and services, including the period and updates applicable to the supply. Article L. 224-25-14 links conformity to characteristics such as functionality, compatibility, accessibility, continuity and security, as well as relevant public statements. Those terms have direct consequences for a product page: a promise of uninterrupted availability, compatibility with a named system or automatic security updates can become part of the customer’s expectation.
The remedy process should be operational, not merely legal prose. Article L. 224-25-17 sets out statutory remedies for non-conformity, while Article L. 224-25-23 addresses reimbursement in the relevant cases. The customer-support team should know how to identify a defect, preserve logs, propose a correction or restoration, stop charging where required, and escalate a repeated outage. The contract can allocate service levels and exclusions within the limits of mandatory law, but a broad disclaimer saying that the supplier gives no guarantee cannot safely contradict an express public promise on the website.
The evidence file should follow the customer journey from advertisement to termination. Preserve the landing-page version, legal notice, terms version, order summary, consent records, customer classification, VAT evidence, invoice, confirmation, renewal notice, support tickets, incident record and termination confirmation. If a dispute concerns whether the customer received a feature, an update or a cancellation route, the company will need more than its current production interface. A simple version-control and retention policy can turn an uncertain dispute into a document review.
Data protection should be coordinated with the company structure. A non-EU company targeting people in France may need a GDPR representative in the European Union, depending on the territorial scope and exemptions of the General Data Protection Regulation. That representative is not a French subsidiary and does not replace an establishment analysis. The SaaS contract should identify the controller and processor roles, the hosting and subprocessor arrangements, international-transfer safeguards and the customer’s contact route. If a French employee or implementation team accesses customer data, the internal access model and the data-processing agreement should reflect that reality.
French language and accessibility should be considered from the customer’s perspective even where an English-language site is commercially intended. An English contract can be workable for an international business customer that understands it, but a consumer checkout, mandatory information, cancellation route and support process require a careful assessment of French mandatory information rules and the audience targeted. The company should not use an English interface as a strategy to avoid French consumer law. Nor should it translate every page mechanically without checking whether the French version changes the legal promise.
A practical launch checklist for the foreign SaaS board is therefore:
- identify the contracting entity and show its real legal identity in the website legal notice;
- separate B2B, small-professional and consumer order flows;
- classify the product as electronic service, digital content, implementation service or a bundle;
- configure the VAT evidence and OSS or registration route before the first taxable invoice;
- document French personnel, premises, agent authority and the treaty permanent-establishment analysis;
- make the terms, price, renewal, withdrawal, immediate-performance and digital-conformity information match the actual checkout;
- send a durable confirmation and retain the transaction evidence; and
- set a review trigger for the first French hire, office, reseller, public tender or material customer outage.
These controls also make the incorporation decision clearer. If the checklist remains manageable from abroad and the French activity is genuinely remote, a French subsidiary may add cost without solving the principal issue. If the checklist reveals local contracting power, a French team, customer-facing delivery and a durable business base, the company should compare a branch and a subsidiary before those facts become accidental rather than designed. A structure chosen after a tax or consumer dispute is usually more expensive than one chosen when the operating model is still flexible.
Conclusion
A foreign SaaS company does not normally need a French subsidiary simply to sell software subscriptions to French customers. It does need a defensible answer to four separate questions: where the customer is located for VAT, what the product legally contains, whether people or premises create a French establishment, and which customer-protection rules govern the contract. Direct sales can work where the supplier remains genuinely abroad, uses a reliable VAT and OSS process, states its identity accurately and designs the checkout around the real customer. A branch or subsidiary becomes more compelling when France has a team, office, local delivery function, regulated responsibility or a strategic need for a separate contracting entity. The prudent launch document is a factual map of contracts, people, premises, invoices and evidence. That map should be revisited whenever the business moves from testing the French market to operating in France.
Need a quick opinion on your case
A telephone consultation with a lawyer from the firm can be arranged within 48 hours to review your SaaS launch, French subsidiary decision, VAT workflow, contract or permanent-establishment risk.
Call 06 46 60 58 22 to discuss the next step with Maître Reda Kohen.
You can also contact the firm through its French contact page.