Has your UK SIPP provider continued to deduct UK PAYE after you moved to France, or refused to pay your drawdown gross? That problem is usually administrative before it becomes a dispute about the final tax bill. “Gross” means the amount paid before UK withholding; it does not mean that France automatically taxes every payment in the same way. The result depends on your treaty residence, the source and legal character of the pension, the wording of the payment, and the evidence supplied to the provider and HMRC. A self-invested personal pension (SIPP) is a UK pension wrapper, not a treaty category in its own right. This guide addresses the practical refusal: the provider says it needs proof, applies a UK tax code, treats a private SIPP as taxable in the United Kingdom, or declines to correct a past payment. It gives a document sequence, a French filing method and a route for repayment or objection. It does not repeat the broader question of where every UK pension is taxed; see our published UK private-pension classification and declaration guide for that overview. It also does not cover a QROPS transfer, French property purchase or company creation. The legal references in this article were checked through the relevant official sources during this run on 5 September 2026; the plan rules, payment dates and facts of your residence still control your case.

I. Why can a UK SIPP provider refuse to pay a French resident gross?

A. Is the payment a private pension under Article 18 or a public-service pension under Article 19?

The first mistake is to treat the provider’s payroll decision as the legal answer. A provider may deduct PAYE because its customer record still shows a UK address, because it has not received acceptable evidence of residence, because its automated system treats an unfamiliar payment as taxable, or because the instruction concerns a lump sum rather than a recurring pension. None of those reasons alone proves that the United Kingdom has the final right to tax the payment.

Start with the pension arrangement. A SIPP is a personal account in which the member chooses investments within a pension wrapper. The wrapper may contain contributions made while the member worked for a private employer, personal contributions, transferred benefits, or rights with a more complicated history. The word “SIPP” therefore describes the vehicle, not every legal feature of the benefit paid out of it. The provider’s statement, the scheme rules and the transaction history must be read together.

For a British citizen who is treaty-resident in France and receives a private pension, the central text is Article 18 of the France–UK income and capital gains tax convention published by Decree no. 2010-20. It covers pensions and similar remuneration paid to a resident of a Contracting State in respect of past employment. Its operative wording is that those amounts “ne sont imposables que dans cet Etat”. In an ordinary private-pension case, that wording points to the State of residence, so a French treaty resident will usually need to deal with France rather than treat UK PAYE as the final result.

The conclusion changes if the payment is connected with public service. Article 19 of the same convention addresses remuneration and pensions paid by a State or a public-law body for services rendered to that State or body. It contains a nationality and residence exception, and its application requires the underlying employment to be identified. A private SIPP funded by private employment should not be described as a UK government pension merely because the payer is based in the United Kingdom. Equally, a transferred or mixed arrangement should not be labelled “private” without checking the rights that were transferred into it.

Ask for a payment-by-payment classification rather than a general answer about the account. The file should distinguish at least the following:

• a regular flexi-access drawdown, which normally looks like recurring pension income;
• an uncrystallised funds pension lump sum, where the provider may split the payment between taxable and non-taxable elements;
• a pension commencement lump sum, sometimes described in the United Kingdom as 25% tax-free cash;
• an annuity, which creates a different payment pattern and contractual record;
• a benefit paid after death, where beneficiary and succession questions arise; and
• a payment containing transferred rights or an entitlement linked to public employment.

Those labels matter because the United Kingdom’s domestic description does not automatically control the French result. A payment called “tax-free cash” under UK rules may still have to be analysed in France if the treaty gives France the taxing right. A payment called “drawdown” may contain a capital element that has to be tested under French rules. A provider’s tax-free label is therefore evidence of the UK treatment, not a complete answer to the treaty question.

The domestic framework must be read with the treaty. Article 79 of the French General Tax Code includes pensions and retirement benefits paid as capital; its text states that “Les traitements, indemnités, émoluments, salaires, pensions et rentes viagères concourent à la formation du revenu global servant de base à l’impôt sur le revenu. Il en est de même des prestations de retraite servies sous forme de capital.” Article 158, paragraph 5(b quinquies), in its version in force from 1 July 2026 then supplies the classification framework for capital retirement benefits. These provisions do not allow a SIPP provider’s payroll label to replace analysis of the payment actually received. In a file involving a regular drawdown, the working assumption may be pension income, but the assumption should be tested against the scheme documents and the reason for the payment.

The French capital-pension option is another reason for a provider refusal to be examined rather than accepted. Article 163 bis, paragraph II, of the French General Tax Code states that “Les prestations de retraite versées sous forme de capital” may, on an express and irrevocable request, be subject to a 7.5% levy that discharges income tax. The provision also requires the payment not to be fractioned and refers to the tax treatment of the contributions. A one-off payment must therefore be separated from a series of monthly drawdowns; the customer cannot obtain the capital treatment simply by renaming several instalments after they were paid.

The Court of Appeal of Bordeaux decision of 3 December 2025, no. 23BX02970 concerned an employer-backed international retirement arrangement, not a SIPP. It is nevertheless a useful warning against accepting the provider’s label without examining the payment. The court held that a disputed sum “ne présente pas le caractère d’une pension de retraite versée en capital mais relève de la catégorie des revenus de capitaux mobiliers.” That conclusion turned on the rights created by the arrangement, the reason the payment became available and the evidence of the underlying account. Keep the provider’s schedule showing whether your benefit is a pension, a capital retirement payment or another investment return; a UK label alone is not decisive in France.

The practical question to put to the provider is precise: “Which fact caused you to withhold UK tax, which provision or payroll rule are you applying, and what document would allow you to review the position?” Ask for the answer in writing. A generic statement that “UK tax is due” is not enough to resolve a France–UK treaty case. The provider may be applying a temporary payroll rule while HMRC has not received a treaty-relief request, or it may be responding to information that is incomplete or inaccurate.

Do not cancel a planned payment merely because the provider has not yet changed its tax code without first checking the consequences. The timing can affect the French tax year, the exchange-rate calculation, the evidence available for a claim and whether the payment is later treated as periodic or capital. A rushed change can make the record harder to explain even when the original problem was only an address or coding error.

B. What evidence proves French treaty residence and the private nature of the SIPP?

The provider and HMRC need evidence that answers two different questions. First, where were you resident for the treaty year? Secondly, what kind of pension payment did you receive? A residence permit answers an immigration question. It does not by itself settle treaty residence. A UK correspondence address answers where letters were sent. It does not by itself prove that you remained resident in the United Kingdom.

Article 4 B of the French General Tax Code begins its domestic list with the words “Sont considérées comme ayant leur domicile fiscal en France au sens de l’article 4 A :”. It refers to the home or principal place of stay, professional activity and centre of economic interests, while also recognising that a treaty can allocate residence to the other State. The French domestic analysis and the treaty tie-breaker should therefore be documented together rather than presented as competing labels.

Build a residence file for the exact year in which each payment was made. It should normally include:

• the dates on which you left the United Kingdom and established your home in France;
• the French address, tenancy or ownership documents and utility records;
• the location of your spouse, civil partner or dependants and the centre of family life;
• French tax registration, returns and notices, where available;
• the number of days spent in each country and a dated travel chronology;
• work, business, directorship, investment and banking information showing where economic decisions were made;
• healthcare registration or other evidence that supports the factual chronology; and
• any UK departure correspondence, HMRC residence material or treaty-relief correspondence.

The Conseil d’État opinion of 12 February 2020, no. 435907 is not a SIPP judgment, but it illustrates why the evidence must follow the treaty analysis. In relation to Article 24, the Council of State stated that “la condition prévue à l’alinéa (i) du a) du paragraphe 3 de l’article 24 de la convention doit être regardée comme satisfaite s’il est établi par le résident de France qu’il a déclaré les revenus en cause au Royaume-Uni”. The opinion concerned treaty credit conditions, not proof of residence itself. Its practical lesson is narrower and safer: retain the UK declaration, certificate and correspondence rather than relying on nationality, a UK bank account or a provider’s assertion.

Then create a separate SIPP classification file. Ask the administrator for the current and historical scheme rules, the member statement, the benefit crystallisation or drawdown instruction, the payment schedule, the gross amount, the net amount, the PAYE deducted, the tax code used and any explanation of the payment type. Request confirmation of whether the provider considers the payment to be:

1. ordinary pension income;
2. a pension commencement lump sum;
3. an uncrystallised funds pension lump sum;
4. a payment under a public-service arrangement; or
5. another benefit, such as a death benefit or a payment following a transfer.

If the provider refuses to pay gross because it says your SIPP is “not covered” by the treaty, ask it to identify the treaty article it has applied and the facts on which it relies. If it says the refusal is caused by missing information, ask for the exact format, issuing authority and date required for the evidence. If it says the payment is a capital benefit, ask it to identify every instalment that formed part of that benefit and the reason for any split.

The distinction between a private SIPP and a public-service pension is especially important where a person previously worked for a public body and later moved rights into a personal arrangement. Do not assume that the origin of one contribution determines the character of every later payment. Conversely, do not assume that a private wrapper erases the history of the rights transferred into it. The transfer deed, employer history and scheme correspondence may be decisive.

The same discipline applies to the 25% UK pension commencement lump sum. Record the date on which benefits were designated, the date on which cash was paid, the amount described as tax-free, the remaining drawdown balance and whether the provider made one transfer or several. If a French 7.5% election is being considered, retain the evidence of contribution deductions or exemptions. The French tax administration’s pension guidance confirms that retirement pensions and capital retirement benefits have distinct declaration treatment. It does not turn every UK tax-free amount into a French tax-free amount.

Prepare a short chronology for the provider and HMRC. The first line should state the date you became resident in France for treaty purposes. The next lines should identify each payment, its gross and net amount, the tax code, the documents sent, the response received and the correction requested. A chronology prevents a common failure: the French return describes a private pension taxable in France, while a UK letter describes the same payment as a public-service benefit or a UK-only payment.

II. How do you obtain gross payment, correct the French return and recover UK withholding?

A. Which provider, HMRC and French filing steps should a British resident follow?

Use three parallel but consistent tracks. The first track is the provider’s payroll record. The second is HMRC or the UK repayment route. The third is the French declaration. The tracks should not be confused: a provider can correct future deductions, HMRC can decide whether UK tax should be repaid, and France can determine how the payment is declared and taxed. One authority’s refusal does not, by itself, answer the other two questions.

Start with a written request to the provider. Identify the SIPP, the member, the French address, the payment dates and the exact treaty position being requested. State whether the benefit is a private pension under Article 18 or whether a different article has to be considered. Attach proof of treaty residence, the payment statement, the scheme classification and the UK tax evidence. Ask the provider to confirm:

• the gross amount of every payment;
• the tax code and PAYE amount applied;
• the reason for withholding;
• the document or HMRC instruction required to change future payments;
• whether past payments can be corrected through the provider’s payroll process; and
• which annual certificate or statement will show the correction.

Do not ask only for “tax-free treatment”. Ask for the precise administrative outcome: future payments made without UK withholding if the treaty conditions are satisfied, a corrected statement, or a repayment route for tax already deducted. If the provider cannot change the code itself, ask it to explain whether it needs an HMRC direction or a treaty-relief application. Keep the original message and the response, including any case reference.

The GOV.UK guidance on tax when you live abroad and receive a pension is the appropriate starting point for the UK side. It explains that treatment can depend on the country of residence and the applicable double-taxation agreement. The GOV.UK France country guidance on tax, benefits and pensions provides administrative context for British citizens in France. Neither page replaces the convention or proves that a particular SIPP payment is private; the request still needs the scheme and residence evidence.

If UK tax has already been deducted, compare the provider’s gross figure with the amount actually received. Article 204 A of the French General Tax Code provides that “Les revenus imposables à l’impôt sur le revenu suivant les règles applicables aux salaires, aux pensions ou aux rentes viagères … donnent lieu … à un prélèvement.” Make a payment table with columns for date, gross sterling, PAYE, other deduction, net sterling, euro conversion and French reporting treatment. Do not use the bank credit as the taxable starting point merely because it is the only figure visible in your account. A net payment can hide both a wrong tax deduction and a currency conversion error.

On the French side, examine Form 2047 for income received outside France together with the general income return for the relevant year. The form instructions change, so use the version for the year of the return. The usual sequence is:

1. identify the payer and the United Kingdom as the source country;
2. record the gross amount and payment dates;
3. convert sterling into euros using the applicable French method and preserve the calculation;
4. describe the payment as periodic pension income or capital only after reviewing the documents;
5. state the treaty article and whether the result is exclusive taxation, a credit method or another tested outcome;
6. record UK PAYE separately from the gross pension; and
7. check that the amount is not duplicated in a pre-filled French line and Form 2047.

The domestic filing duty must be kept separate from the final allocation of taxing rights. Article 170 of the French General Tax Code, in force from 21 February 2026 states that “toute personne imposable audit impôt est tenue de souscrire et de faire parvenir à l’administration une déclaration détaillée”. A treaty claim is not a reason to omit the payment from the file. Report the gross amount through the applicable route and explain why the treaty changes the tax treatment. The French public information service’s pension guidance likewise distinguishes ordinary pension reporting from capital-pension treatment.

Consider the foreign-account question separately. Article 1649 A of the French General Tax Code states that persons domiciled in France may have to declare “les références des comptes ouverts, détenus, utilisés ou clos à l’étranger”. A SIPP is not automatically an ordinary current account, and its reporting status must be checked against the arrangement and the form instructions. Do not use the income declaration to make an assumption about Form 3916 or another foreign-account obligation. Record the issue separately and obtain the relevant instructions for the year.

If the payment is a qualifying single capital benefit, test the French 7.5% option before filing. Article 163 bis II makes the request express and irrevocable and imposes conditions concerning the absence of fractioning and the treatment of contributions. The impots.gouv.fr explanation of retirement pensions identifies the capital-pension lines and the 7.5% option, but the line numbers and form presentation must be checked for the tax year. A provider’s UK 25% description does not remove the need for this French test.

Use a worked calculation only to expose the logic. Suppose a French treaty resident receives four monthly SIPP payments of £2,000 and the provider deducts £400 over the year. The French starting figure is generally the gross £8,000, converted under the applicable method, not the £7,600 deposited. The £400 then has to be classified: if Article 18 gives France the exclusive right to tax the private pension, the UK deduction may need to be corrected or reclaimed in the United Kingdom; if another provision permits taxation in both States, the France–UK method for relief must be applied; if the payments form a single capital benefit, the French capital rules must be tested. The example does not decide the case; it shows why gross, withholding and treaty article must not be collapsed into one number.

Before sending a return or a correction, check these five documents: provider statement, scheme rules, UK PAYE evidence, French residence evidence and the completed form copy. Check these five facts: payment type, gross amount, tax withheld, payment date and treaty article. If one is missing, say so in the covering explanation rather than silently using an assumption.

B. What can you do if the provider refuses, HMRC rejects repayment or France reassesses you?

A refusal should be converted into a reviewable decision. Ask the provider for the refusal in writing, with its reason, the date, the payment affected and the correction route. If the provider says only that its software cannot make the change, request the manual or HMRC route. If it says the United Kingdom has taxing rights, ask whether it is relying on domestic payroll rules or on Article 19 of the convention. If it says your evidence is insufficient, request a list of missing documents rather than sending an unstructured bundle.

If HMRC or the UK administrator rejects a repayment request, preserve the decision and the exact reason. Check whether the rejection concerns residence, payment classification, a missing certificate, the tax year or the deadline. A rejection based on the wrong category should be answered with the scheme documents and treaty analysis, not with a general statement that all UK pensions are taxed in France. A private SIPP, a public-service pension and a capital benefit can follow different routes.

If France has already taxed the gross payment, do not automatically claim a credit for UK PAYE. Article 24 of the France–UK convention sets out the method for eliminating double taxation. The result depends on the income and the provision that permits the United Kingdom to tax it. Where Article 18 gives France exclusive taxing rights, a UK deduction may be an amount to recover from the United Kingdom rather than a credit to subtract from French tax. Where another provision allows UK taxation, the treaty method and French form instructions must be followed.

If the French assessment is wrong, make a formal réclamation, meaning a tax claim asking the French administration to correct the assessment. State the tax year, assessment number, payment dates, gross and net amounts, UK withholding, treaty article, calculation and remedy requested. Attach the provider’s written decision, residence evidence, scheme rules, payment statements, UK correspondence, Form 2047 and the exchange-rate working. Ask the tax office to identify whether its position concerns residence, classification, declaration, social charges or double-tax relief; those issues should not be mixed in one unexplained figure.

Protect the deadline from the beginning. Article R*196-1 of the French Book of Tax Procedures contains the ordinary French claim periods, including the rule that most claims are filed by 31 December of the second year following the relevant assessment, payment or event, subject to special provisions. The relevant date must be checked against the actual assessment and payment history. Do not count from the day on which the provider finally admitted that a withholding may have been wrong.

The Court of Appeal of Lyon decision of 25 August 2020, no. 19LY03464 is relevant to the procedural distinction. In the context of the capital-pension option, the court reproduced the explanation that “Afin d’éviter des rachats partiels échelonnés de l’épargne constituée dans le cadre d’un régime ou contrat de retraite, équivalents à une sortie en rente, tout en bénéficiant de l’imposition au taux réduit de 7,5 %, le bénéfice de ce dispositif est réservé aux versements non fractionnés.” That decision does not make every SIPP drawdown eligible for the 7.5% option. It shows why a taxpayer should preserve the claim route while still proving the payment’s capital character, non-fractioning and contribution history.

If the disagreement is between France and the United Kingdom about residence or treaty application, Article 26 of the convention provides a mutual-agreement procedure. It can be relevant where measures by one or both States produce taxation contrary to the convention. The text says that “Le cas doit être soumis dans les trois ans qui suivent la première notification de la mesure qui entraîne une imposition non conforme aux dispositions de la présente Convention ou dans les six ans qui suivent la fin de l’année fiscale ou de la période d’imposition”. This international route does not suspend the need to protect a domestic French claim or pursue the UK repayment process promptly.

Use the following decision table to keep the routes separate:

Problem	Immediate request	Evidence to attach
Provider withholds PAYE from an ordinary private SIPP drawdown	Written review of the UK code and treaty-relief route; request corrected future payments and a past-payment statement	French treaty residence file, private employment history, scheme rules, gross payments and PAYE record
Provider says the benefit is public service or mixed	Ask for the exact rights and employment period relied upon; separate the components before asking for relief	Employment record, transfer documents, scheme classification and payment breakdown
One capital payment is treated as ordinary drawdown in France	Test Article 163 bis and the 7.5% option; protect a French réclamation if the original return omitted it	One-payment evidence, non-fractioning proof, contribution tax treatment and original return
France taxes the payment and the United Kingdom also withholds	Apply Article 24 before claiming a credit; seek UK correction where France has exclusive taxing rights	Gross and net statements, treaty analysis, final UK tax decision and French computation
Both administrations dispute residence or treaty classification	Protect domestic remedies and consider the Article 26 mutual-agreement route	Dated residence chronology, notices, correspondence and copies of claims

Do not allow the provider’s refusal to create a second error in France. If the provider later refunds UK PAYE, update the reconciliation and make sure the refund is not reported as a new pension payment. If France has already issued an assessment based on a net figure, explain the gross amount and the correction history. If a future payment is made gross after several net payments, preserve the dates and do not average the results across tax years.

Before filing a claim, check six dates: the date French treaty residence began, each payment date, each UK withholding date, the French return date, the French assessment date and the last day for a réclamation. Then check six figures: gross sterling, UK PAYE, other deductions, euro conversion, French declared amount and any credit or refund. A signed reconciliation is often more useful than a long narrative that never identifies the disputed number.

The provider’s final answer should be treated as evidence, not as a substitute for legal analysis. If it confirms that the only obstacle was a missing residence document, send the document and request a new effective date. If it maintains that the payment is taxable in the United Kingdom, identify the treaty article and challenge the classification if the facts do not support it. If it refuses to explain its position, keep the refusal and move to the HMRC and French routes with a clear record of what was asked.

The same file can support a later professional review. Give the adviser the chronology, the scheme documents, the payment table, the residence evidence, the provider’s refusal, the UK correspondence and the French forms. Explain the practical outcome you need: future gross payment, repayment of past PAYE, correction of a French assessment, a 7.5% election or a mutual-agreement analysis. That makes the advice question concrete and avoids asking one authority to decide a problem that belongs to another.

Conclusion

When a UK SIPP provider refuses to pay a French resident gross, the refusal is usually the start of the analysis, not proof that UK tax is finally due. Establish treaty residence for the payment year, identify whether the SIPP benefit is private, public-service, periodic or capital, and obtain the provider’s reason and supporting rule. Article 18 may point a private pension towards France, while Article 19, a capital benefit or mixed rights may require a different route.

The practical sequence is to secure the gross and PAYE records, build the residence and scheme files, request a written provider review, follow the HMRC repayment or treaty-relief route, declare the French position using the relevant year’s forms and protect a French réclamation if an assessment is wrong. The 25% UK label does not decide the French treatment, and a UK deduction does not automatically become a French credit. A complete chronology and reconciliation give each administration the facts it needs to correct its own part of the problem.

Need a quick opinion on your case

A telephone consultation within 48 hours with a lawyer from the firm can help you challenge a UK SIPP withholding, organise the treaty evidence and identify the correct French filing or claim route.

Call +33 6 46 60 58 22 to discuss the issue with Maître Reda Kohen, or use the contact form.