Your French Bank Just Refused an Account to Your Foreign-Owned Company: Capital Deposit, Droit au Compte and Signing Contracts Before the Kbis Arrives

You incorporated a SAS in France from London, New York or Dubai. The articles are signed, the funds for the share capital are ready to be wired, and then the French bank answers no: no deposit account for the capital, no current account for the business, sometimes without a written reason. For a foreign founder this refusal feels like a dead end, because everything else in the formation process seems to depend on a bank: the certificate that proves the capital was deposited, the company registration that produces the Kbis (the official extract of the commercial register, issued by the court clerk’s office known as the greffe, which proves the company exists), and the operating account that will receive customer payments and pay the first salaries and the first VAT bills. This article explains the three legal mechanisms that unblock the situation: the capital deposit regime for a company in formation, which does not require the refusing bank; the statutory right to an account, called the droit au compte, which forces the designation of a bank through the Banque de France (the French central bank); and the rules for signing leases and contracts before the Kbis arrives, as reshaped by a major Court of Cassation ruling of 29 November 2023. Each mechanism is presented with the exact statutory wording, so a founder living abroad can prepare the right file, send the right letter, and keep the project moving while the banks take their time. Readers who are still at the planning stage will find the broader roadmap in our companion guide on setting up a company in France as a foreign founder, from bank account to Kbis, VAT and first hire.

I. Getting the money into France when no bank wants your company yet

The first misunderstanding is believing that the capital deposit and the current account are the same thing. They are not. The deposit of the starting capital is a one-off formality performed for a company that does not legally exist yet, and the statute provides several possible depositaries. The current account is a lasting business relationship that the bank is free to refuse, subject to the droit au compte procedure. Separating the two problems is the fastest way to unblock a formation.

A. Where a foreign founder deposits the starting capital and what paper it produces

When a French company is formed with cash contributions, the money must be frozen with an authorised depositary before registration. In a SARL (société à responsabilité limitée, the French limited liability company), Article L. 223-7 of the Commercial Code provides that “Les parts sociales doivent être souscrites en totalité par les associés”, meaning all the shares must be subscribed in full by the members, and that “Les fonds provenant de la libération des parts sociales sont déposés dans les conditions et délais déterminés par décret en Conseil d’Etat”, meaning the funds are deposited under conditions and time limits set by decree. For companies formed with cash subscriptions generally, Article L. 225-5 of the Commercial Code states that “Les fonds provenant des souscriptions en numéraire et la liste des souscripteurs avec l’indication des sommes versées par chacun d’eux font l’objet d’un dépôt dans les conditions déterminées par décret en Conseil d’Etat”, so the funds and the list of subscribers showing each person’s payment are deposited together, and it adds a strict custody rule: “nul ne peut détenir plus de huit jours les sommes recueillies pour le compte d’une société en formation”. Nobody may therefore sit on the collected money for more than eight days, which matters when funds transit through an intermediary before reaching the depositary.

In practice, the official business guide published by the French administration explains that the company’s legal representative deposits the capital with an établissement de crédit (a licensed credit institution, in substance a bank) or with a notary, and that a payment institution is not an acceptable depositary. The bank or the notary must then issue an attestation de dépôt des fonds, a deposit certificate identifying the company being formed, its future registered office and the amounts paid by each subscriber. That certificate is described by the administration as a document indispensable au dossier d’immatriculation, an essential part of the registration file. For a foreign founder, the practical lesson is immediate: if one bank refuses even the deposit, try another bank, a notary, or, for some situations, the Caisse des dépôts et consignations (the public deposit institution), rather than treating one refusal as the end of the project. The deposit step does not create a lasting account relationship, so it is often easier to obtain than a full current account, and the certificate it produces unlocks the next step, which is registration.

Registration itself is filed through the Guichet unique (the single online company formalities portal run by the INPI, the French industrial property office, which forwards files to the registries). Once the greffe registers the company in the Registre du commerce et des sociétés (the trade and companies register, usually shortened to RCS), the company acquires legal personality, and the greffe issues the Kbis. Article L. 210-6 of the Commercial Code states the principle in one sentence: “Les sociétés commerciales jouissent de la personnalité morale à dater de leur immatriculation au registre du commerce et des sociétés”. Commercial companies enjoy legal personality only from their RCS registration. Before that date, the company cannot act by itself, which is why the founders act in its name, and why the funds stay frozen until the Kbis allows their release to the company’s first real account.

B. Preparing a file that survives anti-money-laundering checks from abroad

Banks that refuse foreign-owned companies rarely say so openly, but the most common lawful ground is anti-money-laundering compliance. Before entering into a business relationship, the persons subject to these duties must, under Article L. 561-5 of the Monetary and Financial Code, “Identifient leur client et, le cas échéant, le bénéficiaire effectif au sens de l’article L. 561-2-2” and “Vérifient ces éléments d’identification sur présentation de tout document écrit à caractère probant”. They identify the client and where relevant the beneficial owner, and they verify those identities against probative written documents. The beneficial owner is defined by Article L. 561-2-2 of the Monetary and Financial Code, under which “le bénéficiaire effectif est la ou les personnes physiques : 1° Soit qui contrôlent en dernier lieu, directement ou indirectement, le client”. In a foreign-owned French SAS, that means the bank will look through the chain of companies to the individual who ultimately controls the structure, wherever that person lives.

If the bank cannot satisfy these identification duties, the statute orders it to walk away. Article L. 561-8 of the Monetary and Financial Code provides: “elle n’exécute aucune opération, quelles qu’en soient les modalités, n’établit ni ne poursuit aucune relation d’affaires”. Where it cannot perform the checks, it carries out no transaction and establishes or pursues no business relationship. This is the legal reason behind many refusals received by non-resident founders: documents in a foreign language without a sworn translation, a complex holding chain with no clear register extract, a beneficial owner who cannot attend identification, or funds whose origin the file does not document. The refusal is then not a judgment on the project but a compliance stop, and the way back is a stronger file, not insistence.

A founder living abroad should therefore assemble, before any bank meeting or online application, a pack that answers the identification questions in advance: a passport or identity card of every subscriber and of the ultimate individual owner, a recent proof of address, the draft articles showing the chain of ownership up to the individual, an extract of the foreign parent company’s register with a sworn French translation where needed, a short written explanation of the origin of the funds with supporting bank statements, and the contact details of a representative reachable in France. Sending this pack complete, in French or with translations, shortens the process and reduces the risk of a second refusal, including after the Banque de France designates a bank, because, as will be seen, the designated bank may still refuse if it cannot perform the same checks.

II. Turning a refusal into an account and protecting contracts signed while waiting

Once the capital is deposited and the file is clean, two battles remain: obtaining a real operating account despite the first refusal, and keeping the business alive in the weeks before the Kbis arrives, when leases, suppliers and service providers all ask for signatures. French law answers both questions, the first with an administrative designation procedure, the second with judge-made rules on pre-registration commitments.

A. From the written refusal to the Banque de France designation and the basic services

The droit au compte belongs to companies as well as individuals. Article L. 312-1 of the Monetary and Financial Code opens with the principle: “A droit à l’ouverture d’un compte de dépôt dans l’établissement de crédit de son choix, sous réserve d’être dépourvu d’un tel compte en France : 1° Toute personne physique ou morale domiciliée en France”. Any individual or legal entity domiciled in France, holding no such account, is entitled to the opening of a deposit account with the credit institution of its choice. A French SAS or SARL, even owned entirely from abroad, is a legal entity domiciled in France once its registered office is fixed there, so it falls within the text. The first practical step is therefore to demand, at the counter or in writing, that the refusing bank hands over the refusal certificate. The statute is explicit: “L’établissement de crédit qui a refusé l’ouverture d’un compte fournit au demandeur systématiquement, gratuitement et sans délai, sur support papier, et sur un autre support durable lorsque celui-ci en fait la demande expresse, une attestation de refus d’ouverture de compte”. The bank must systematically, free of charge and without delay, supply a written refusal certificate, and it must inform the applicant that the Banque de France can designate an institution. Without that paper, the designation procedure cannot start, so a founder who receives only an oral no should reply in writing asking for the attestation de refus.

With the certificate in hand, the applicant seizes the Banque de France, which designates a credit institution near the domicile or another place of the applicant’s choice, taking market shares into account. The timetable is fast: Article L. 312-1 of the Monetary and Financial Code orders designation “dans un délai d’un jour ouvré à compter de la réception des pièces requises”, within one business day from receipt of the required documents. The designated bank must then open the account and provide a defined basket of basic services. Article D. 312-5 of the Monetary and Financial Code lists them: “Les prestations de base mentionnées au II de l’article L. 312-1 comprennent : 1° L’ouverture, la tenue et la clôture du compte”, followed by address changes, bank identity statements, direct debit domiciliation, monthly statements, cheque and transfer collection, SEPA payments, remote balance consultation, cash deposits and withdrawals, and a payment card usable online and for withdrawals in the European Union. A founder should calibrate expectations here: the designated account covers daily operations, transfers, direct debits and a card, but it is not a credit line, an overdraft or a tailored business banking package, and those extras remain subject to commercial negotiation later.

One limit must be stated clearly, because it surprises many applicants. The designation does not override anti-money-laundering duties. Article L. 561-8 of the Monetary and Financial Code adds: “Le I s’applique également lorsqu’un établissement de crédit a été désigné par la Banque de France sur le fondement de l’article L. 312-1”. The duty to refuse where identification cannot be performed applies equally to a bank designated by the Banque de France. In other words, the designation procedure cures a commercial refusal, not a compliance failure. This is why the identification pack described above should be sent to the designated bank immediately and completely: a second refusal grounded in unverifiable identity restarts the problem instead of solving it. Founders who live outside France should also expect the designated bank to ask for enhanced proof of the origin of funds and of the ownership chain, and should treat those requests as normal rather than hostile.

B. Signing the lease and the first contracts before the Kbis without exposing the founder

While the account procedure runs, the business usually cannot wait: the landlord wants the commercial lease signed, the supplier wants the order form, the freelancer wants the service agreement. Since the company has no legal personality before RCS registration, someone must sign for it, and Article L. 210-6 of the Commercial Code attaches a severe default rule: “Les personnes qui ont agi au nom d’une société en formation avant qu’elle ait acquis la jouissance de la personnalité morale sont tenues solidairement et indéfiniment responsables des actes ainsi accomplis, à moins que la société, après avoir été régulièrement constituée et immatriculée, ne reprenne les engagements souscrits”. Those who acted in the name of a company in formation remain jointly and indefinitely liable for what they signed, unless the company, once duly formed and registered, takes over the commitments, which are then deemed subscribed by the company from the start. The founder therefore signs personally at first, and is released only through reprise, the takeover of the commitment by the registered company.

The safest way to organise that takeover is written and dated from the beginning. For joint-stock-type companies, Article R. 210-6 of the Commercial Code describes the classic mechanism: “l’état des actes accomplis pour le compte de la société en formation, avec l’indication, pour chacun d’eux, de l’engagement qui en résulterait pour la société, est tenu à la disposition des actionnaires”, a statement of the acts performed for the company in formation, showing the commitment each would create, is made available to the shareholders, and “Cet état est annexé aux statuts, dont la signature emporte reprise des engagements par la société, lorsque celle-ci a été immatriculée au registre du commerce”. The statement is annexed to the articles, and signing the articles operates as takeover once the company is registered. In an SARL or SAS, the equivalent practice is to list each pre-registration act in an annex to the articles or in a shareholders’ decision, and to give a written mandate to the person who will sign, describing each commitment precisely. A founder living abroad should therefore never sign “for the company” in vague terms: each lease, order or service contract should state that it is concluded for the account of the named company in formation, and should appear on the annexed list.

A ruling of 29 November 2023 makes this paperwork even more important while softening one old trap. In Court of Cassation, Commercial Chamber, 29 November 2023, appeal no. 22-21.623, the Court recalled the foundation first: “Il résulte des articles L. 210-6 et R. 210-6 du code de commerce que les sociétés commerciales jouissent de la personnalité morale à dater de leur immatriculation au registre du commerce et des sociétés”. It then described years of case law under which only commitments expressly subscribed “au nom” or “pour le compte” of the company in formation could be taken over, with acts signed merely “par” the unregistered company treated as void. The Court criticised the side effects of that rigidity and reversed course: “il apparaît possible et souhaitable de reconnaître désormais au juge le pouvoir d’apprécier souverainement, par un examen de l’ensemble des circonstances, tant intrinsèques à l’acte qu’extrinsèques, si la commune intention des parties n’était pas que l’acte soit conclu au nom ou pour le compte de la société en formation”. Judges may now assess, from all the circumstances inside and outside the document, whether the parties’ common intention was that the act be concluded in the name or for the account of the company in formation, so that the company can later take it over. In that case the Court approved the court of appeal which, “dans l’exercice de son pouvoir souverain d’appréciation”, had found such a common intention despite an improperly worded document, and “a ordonné l’exécution de la promesse litigieuse”.

For a foreign founder this ruling is good news but not a permission to be careless. It means an imperfectly worded pre-Kbis contract is no longer automatically void where the file clearly shows both sides knew they were dealing with a company in formation. It does not remove the founder’s personal liability where no takeover happens, and it does not guarantee that a judge will find the common intention where the paperwork is silent. The method therefore stays the same: write on every pre-registration document that it is signed for the account of the specified company in formation, keep the emails showing the other party knew the Kbis was pending, list the act on the annex to the articles, and complete the takeover decision right after registration. Emails and drafts exchanged from abroad count as extrinsic circumstances a judge can examine, so founders should preserve them instead of negotiating only by phone.

Conclusion

A bank refusal is a frequent and unpleasant step in forming a French company from abroad, but it is a regulated step, not a final one. The capital deposit can be made with another bank or a notary and produces the certificate the registration file requires. The identification file, built around the ultimate individual owner and the origin of the funds, answers the compliance objections that cause most refusals. The written refusal certificate opens the Banque de France designation, which delivers a working deposit account with defined basic services within a short timetable. And while the Kbis is pending, each commitment should be signed expressly for the account of the named company in formation, listed on the annex to the articles, and taken over after registration, under the clarified rules stated by the Court of Cassation on 29 November 2023. Taken in that order, the four moves turn weeks of waiting into a documented process the founder controls from any country.