Since the end of the Brexit transition period, British buyers have kept buying houses in France, but they buy as third-country nationals. For a couple with children, for siblings buying together, or for parents helping adult children, the French société civile immobilière (SCI — a non-trading property company) remains the most flexible envelope: it organises joint ownership, it structures who decides and who pays, and it prepares transmission. It does not remove tax, it does not bypass French succession rules, and since Brexit it does not restore any European privilege. Used properly, it gives a British family a written constitution for a French house. Used loosely, it creates deadlock, unexpected tax bills and litigation between relatives.
This guide explains, for a British reader, how an SCI works for a French home after Brexit, what it costs in tax and on death, and what to do when something is blocked: a bank that will not lend to the SCI, a co-owner who will not leave, a valuation dispute, or a tax assessment the family considers wrong. Every French term is explained at first use. French law is cited from its official source and court decisions are quoted word for word.
I. How a British family buys and holds a French home through an SCI after Brexit
A. Should a British family create an SCI to buy a French house, and how is it set up?
An SCI is a société civile (non-commercial company) whose object is to own and manage property. It is governed by the general provisions on non-trading companies. Article 1845 of the Civil Code states that: “Les dispositions du présent chapitre sont applicables à toutes les sociétés civiles, à moins qu’il n’y soit dérogé par le statut légal particulier auquel certaines d’entre elles sont assujetties.” In plain terms, the SCI borrows the standard protective framework of French company law, and the family constitution — the statuts (articles of association) — fills in the details.
For British buyers, three Brexit points matter before signature. First, buying through an SCI does not require prior authorisation: a British national can be an associé (shareholder) and even gérant (manager) of an SCI, because a purely civil property company is not a regulated commercial activity. Second, the purchase itself follows ordinary French conveyancing: preliminary contract, ten-day cooling-off period for residential buyers, funds through the notaire (the public officer who authenticates the deed), registration at the service de publicité foncière (land registry). The gov.uk guidance on buying property in France reminds British buyers that French process and fees differ entirely from England and that local legal advice is needed; the service-public.fr pages on buying housing describe the French stages from the French side. Third, banks treat a newly formed family SCI with British-resident shareholders as higher risk: expect requests for larger deposits, life cover assigned to the loan, and proof of the origin of funds for anti-money-laundering checks. A refusal of credit is not in itself unlawful, but a refusal tainted by discrimination or by a manifest error in the file can be challenged with evidence.
Formation is straightforward but each step has consequences. The family drafts the statuts, specifying the registered office (often the French house itself or the notaire’s address for service), the duration (commonly 99 years), the contributions (cash and, where relevant, property contributed), the allocation of parts sociales (shares, which are not freely transferable securities), the approval (agrément) clause for any transfer to a third party, the powers of the gérant, voting thresholds, and what happens on death, divorce or disagreement. Article 1846 of the Civil Code provides that: “La société est gérée par une ou plusieurs personnes, associées ou non, nommées soit par les statuts, soit par un acte distinct, soit par une décision des associés.” Choose the manager deliberately: a single spouse-manager is efficient but fragile if the couple separates, while joint management (cogérance) protects both at the price of slower decisions. The SCI is then registered with the registre du commerce et des sociétés (companies register) via the guichet unique (single formalities portal) and receives its SIREN number; only after registration does it have legal personality and can it sign the acte authentique (notarial deed) as buyer.
Drafting traps specific to British families deserve attention. Do not copy an English-language template that speaks of directors, shareholders’ agreements under English law and floating charges: the SCI has a gérant, associés, and French-law concepts that do not translate. Provide expressly for contributions in different proportions (parents funding 80 per cent but giving children real rights), for a loan by parents recorded in a compte courant d’associé (shareholder loan account) rather than confused with capital, for occupation rights (who may live in the house, for how long, at what rent or indemnity), and for the arrival of grandchildren or the departure of an ex-spouse. Provide an approval clause that is neither a complete lock-in nor a blank cheque: French courts uphold reasonable approval clauses but sanction manoeuvres that strip a shareholder of any exit. Link the SCI to the wider estate plan from day one: the detailed analysis of choosing English law for a French house and protecting children under the forced-heirship reserve explains why the will, the matrimonial regime and the SCI articles must speak with one voice. For the mechanics shared by all nationalities, start with the SCI for foreign buyers in France: structure, protections and legal traps every investor must know; this article covers only what is specific to British families since Brexit.
Practical evidence matters more than theory. Keep the bank transfer slips proving who funded what, the minutes (procès-verbaux) of every meeting, the manager’s annual report (rapport de gérance), and the accounts even when the SCI is small. When siblings later disagree about whether a payment was a gift, a loan or a contribution, these papers decide the case. In Paris and the Île-de-France, where many British-owned SCIs are administered by a Paris notaire while the house sits in Normandy or the Dordogne, insist on dematerialised minutes and a clear delegation for urgent repairs, so a leaking roof does not become a governance crisis.
B. Who decides, who pays and how does a family member leave a French SCI without a court battle?
Day-to-day power sits with the gérant, major choices sit with the collective of associés. The manager can insure, repair, let on an ordinary lease and pay tax; selling the house, borrowing heavily, or changing the articles normally requires a collective decision at the majority fixed by the articles. Costs follow the shares unless the articles provide otherwise: local property taxes, insurance, co-ownership charges and loan instalments are paid by the SCI from rents or from calls for funds (appels de fonds), and a shareholder who advances money holds a repayable loan account, not an automatic larger slice of the house.
Departure is where families discover whether their articles were well written. The standard routes are sale of the shares with approval, withdrawal (retrait), and redemption or exclusion where the articles allow it. Article 1869 of the Civil Code provides the baseline: “Sans préjudice des droits des tiers, un associé peut se retirer totalement ou partiellement de la société, dans les conditions prévues par les statuts ou, à défaut, après autorisation donnée par une décision unanime des autres associés.” Failing agreement, the statute adds that withdrawal may also be authorised on good grounds (justes motifs) by a court order. The Cour de cassation has clarified the architecture of this right in a recent family SCI dispute, Third Civil Chamber, 24 September 2026, No 24-17.185, recalling first that: “Sans préjudice des droits des tiers, un associé peut se retirer totalement ou partiellement de la société, dans les conditions prévues par les statuts ou, à défaut, après autorisation donnée par une décision unanime des autres associés. Ce retrait peut également être autorisé pour justes motifs par une décision de justice.” The same decision then holds that the timing rule is only a default: “cette règle, qui, pour l’application de l’article 1869 du code précité, n’est que supplétive de la volonté des associés, est susceptible de faire l’objet d’une clause statutaire contraire.” Families should use that freedom: state expressly whether the departing member ceases to be a shareholder on the day withdrawal is exercised, on approval of the accounts, or only on actual repayment, because dividends, votes and liability for fresh calls depend on that date.
Valuation is the second flashpoint. Where the articles refer to expert valuation or the parties cannot agree, Article 1843-4 of the Civil Code sends valuation to an independent expert appointed by agreement or by the president of the court. The Commercial Chamber drew a sharp procedural line in Commercial Chamber, 18 September 2024, No 23-13.510: “Il résulte de l’article 1843-4 du code civil que la décision par laquelle le président du tribunal procède à la désignation d’un expert chargé de déterminer la valeur de droits sociaux est sans recours possible.” The only crack in that wall is excess of power. The same ruling specifies the correct forum: “Il résulte de ce texte que le président d’un tribunal saisi sur son fondement statue selon la procédure accélérée au fond.” A president who instead orders a general building valuation under the wrong procedural rules commits an excess of power and the decision can be censured. For a British family this means: apply to the president of the tribunal judiciaire (ordinary civil court) of the SCI’s registered office under the fast-track procedure on the merits, ask strictly for valuation of the shares (not a disguised full property survey), and do not expect an appeal on the merits of the figure — the remedy for a bad method is a precise challenge to the expert’s mission, not a second opinion.
Dissolution is the last resort, and courts ration it. Ending the SCI requires one of the cases in Article 1844-7 of the Civil Code, including judicial dissolution for good grounds (justes motifs), such as non-performance of obligations or paralysis. In Third Civil Chamber, 16 March 2011, No 10-15.459, the Court approved the test that lower courts still apply: “la mésentente existant entre les associés et par suite la disparition de l’affectio societatis ne pouvaient constituer un juste motif de dissolution qu’à la condition de se traduire par une paralysie du fonctionnement de la société”. Quarrels, separate holidays in the same house and even the breakdown of a couple are not enough while rents still come in, loans are still paid and meetings can still be held. A British co-owner who wants out should therefore plead withdrawal and valuation first, and reserve dissolution for genuine deadlock: no accounts, no meetings, unpaid loans, a house left empty and deteriorating.
Challenges follow different tracks. A shareholder who considers a meeting irregular or a manager’s act abusive (abus de majorité, abus de minorité) sues the SCI before the tribunal judiciaire to annul the resolution or to engage the manager’s liability, with minutes, convocations and proxies as the decisive exhibits. A manager facing a manifestly obstructive minority can ask the court to appoint a provisional administrator. Time limits are short and delay weakens every claim, so formal notice (mise en demeure) by recorded letter should be sent early, quantifying the sums and the decision requested.
II. What a British-owned SCI really costs in French tax and on death, and how to challenge the bill
A. How is a British-owned SCI taxed while the family lives, lets or sells the French house?
The default SCI is tax-transparent (translucide): it does not pay income tax itself, each associé is taxed on a share of the result. The mechanism sits in Article 8 of the General Tax Code for partnerships and in the property-company provisions around Article 1655 ter of the General Tax Code, which identify companies whose real object is the construction, acquisition or management of buildings divided among shareholders. Rental income from an unfurnished letting is taxed in the hands of French-resident shareholders as property income (revenus fonciers), with the micro-foncier allowance or actual expenses, plus the 17.2 per cent social charges and income tax at the progressive scale; non-resident shareholders are taxed in France on French-source rents with a minimum rate, and must file even where a British return also exists. The France-United Kingdom double tax treaty of 19 June 2008 gives the situs state (France, for a French house) the primary right to tax rental income and capital gains on immovable property, while the residence state eliminates double taxation by credit; impots.gouv.fr return guides and the treaty text must be read together rather than choosing the more convenient country.
Furnished letting changes the picture sharply. A family SCI that lets furnished accommodation may be treated as carrying on a commercial activity, risking reclassification, loss of the purely civil character and exposure to corporate tax. Short-term holiday letting adds registration, change-of-use and co-ownership authorisation issues in many cities, including Paris where controls are strict. Families who want occasional holiday lets should take advice before the first booking, fix the letting model in the minutes, and keep separate accounts: the tax administration looks at facts, not labels.
Sale is taxed at two levels that families often confuse: the SCI sells the house, or the shareholder sells the shares. Where the transparent SCI sells the building, Article 150 U of the General Tax Code applies to gains made “lors de la cession à titre onéreux de biens immobiliers bâtis ou non bâtis ou de droits relatifs à ces biens”. The notaire computes and withholds the capital gains tax and social charges at completion, applying the taper for length of ownership (abattements pour durée de détention), the surtax on large gains where relevant, and the treaty position of non-resident sellers. Where instead a parent sells SCI shares to a child, transfer duty under Article 726 of the General Tax Code applies at 5 per cent for a predominantly property SCI, on top of any gain on the shares themselves, and the price must be defensible by reference to the underlying property net of debt. Under-pricing shares to save duty invites reassessment with penalties.
The SCI can elect for corporate tax (impôt sur les sociétés), the regime described by Article 206 of the General Tax Code. Electing companies pay annual tax on profits, can depreciate the building (excluding land), and on sale compute the gain from the depreciated book value — often a much larger taxable gain than under the private capital-gains taper. The election suits families holding through a structure that retains profits or carries debt, but it is generally irreversible without cost and it forfeits the private-residence and taper advantages. Since Brexit, British shareholders should also model the United Kingdom side: HMRC taxes United Kingdom residents on worldwide gains with its own computations, and treaty credit mechanics must be documented with French assessments and completion statements, using gov.uk guidance on tax if leaving or returning to the United Kingdom alongside French notices.
Annual wealth and occupation taxes complete the picture. Shares in an SCI fall within the base of the French real-estate wealth tax (impôt sur la fortune immobilière, IFI) where the household exceeds the threshold: Article 965 of the General Tax Code counts shares in property companies in the taxable base, with debts deductible only under strict conditions and shareholder loan accounts scrutinised. The yearly taxe foncière (land tax) is borne by the owner — here the SCI — while second homes remain exposed to the taxe d’habitation sur les résidences secondaires with possible surcharges in tight housing zones. None of these charges is a Brexit penalty, but British owners who budgeted on English council-tax scales are often surprised by the cumulative French total.
When the administration reassesses, procedure protects the careful. A proposal of reassessment (proposition de rectification) must state facts, amounts and legal bases; the taxpayer has, in the standard procedure, thirty days to respond with documents and treaty arguments, may request a meeting with the senior reviewer (interlocuteur départemental), and then receives a reply before any recovery. Assessment notices are challenged first by administrative claim (réclamation contentieuse) within the statutory deadline, then before the administrative court (tribunal administratif). Keep every assessment, lease, loan offer, completion statement and 2042/2044/2072 return: treaty-credit disputes are won on paper showing the same income taxed twice.
B. What happens to SCI shares when a British shareholder dies, and which challenge actually works?
Death does not end the SCI. Article 1870 of the Civil Code provides that: “La société n’est pas dissoute par le décès d’un associé, mais continue avec ses héritiers ou légataires, sauf à prévoir dans les statuts qu’ils doivent être agréés par les associés.” Families should decide now which version they want: automatic continuation with heirs (simple, but the surviving spouse may suddenly co-own with stepchildren), continuation subject to approval with buyout of the heir’s interest (orderly, but cash must be available), or dissolution on death (rare, and dangerous where a loan survives). Where the deceased was manager, the articles should name an interim manager or a fast appointment mechanism so rents, insurance and loan payments do not stall during probate.
Succession law and succession tax are two different questions. Succession law (who gets what) for deaths connected to France is governed by the European Succession Regulation No 650/2012 for participating states, under which the default is the law of the last habitual residence with a limited choice of the law of nationality; the United Kingdom never participated, but a British testator habitually resident in France can still choose English law for the estate as the law of nationality, within French public-policy limits including the compensation mechanisms protecting children. Succession tax (who pays what) is governed by domestic law and by the 1963 France-United Kingdom estate treaty covering inheritance and gift duties on immovable property: French houses are taxable in France wherever the deceased lived. Article 750 ter of the General Tax Code extends French gift and inheritance duties to French-sited assets and, in defined cases, to worldwide assets where the deceased or the heir was French-resident. In practice the Paris or provincial notaire files the déclaration de succession (estate return) within six months of death for a death in France (twelve months where death occurred abroad), values the SCI shares by transparency — the underlying property less properly documented company debt — applies allowances (abattements) and the progressive scale, and claims treaty credit for any United Kingdom inheritance tax on the same French house to avoid double payment.
English probate does not by itself unlock a French bank account or transfer SCI shares. The heir or executor obtains English probate, then instructs the French notaire, who verifies the will, the applicable law analysis, the heirship and the matrimonial regime before distributing. Since Brexit there is no United Kingdom-issued European Certificate of Succession; the French notaire works from probate with translation and, where needed, a French certificate of heirship (acte de notoriété). Banks that freeze the SCI account pending proof of heirship are performing their duty; persistent refusal despite a complete file can be escalated to the mediator and then to the court, with interest claimed on wrongfully retained funds.
Disputes between survivors follow the same hierarchy as lifetime disputes: approval of the heir, valuation of the bought-out interest under Article 1843-4, and only then dissolution. An heir refused approval is entitled to the value of the rights, fixed amicably or by expert; delay in payment carries interest and may justify a court-appointed administrator. A surviving spouse who occupied the house should regularise the basis of occupation quickly — retained shareholding with dividends, lease, or court-ordered arrangement — because prolonged free occupation without title depresses the valuation and poisons the buyout negotiation.
For the Paris and Île-de-France practice point promised earlier: where the SCI is registered in Paris, applications for expert valuation go to the president of the Paris judicial court under the fast-track procedure, valuations are typically entrusted to a sworn expert from the Paris Court of Appeal list, and estate returns for Paris-sited houses are handled by Paris notaires with tight Land Registry turnaround. Provincial houses owned from Paris should keep one Paris contact for papers and one local contact for access, because experts and notaires will both need entry.
Conclusion
A French SCI remains a sound vehicle for a British family house after Brexit when it is treated as what it is: a French company with French tax transparency, French corporate formalities and French succession consequences. Put the difficult clauses in the articles while everyone still agrees — approval, valuation method, management after death, occupation and funding — keep minutes and accounts as if they will one day be exhibits, and model tax on both sides of the Channel before electing for corporate tax or selling shares instead of the house. Where a valuation, an approval or an assessment goes wrong, French law offers calibrated remedies: expert valuation under Article 1843-4, court-authorised withdrawal under Article 1869, dissolution only for genuine paralysis, and reasoned administrative challenge with treaty credit. The family that writes its rules early rarely needs them; the family that improvises discovers them in court.