You sold your French house, the notaire kept 19 per cent income tax plus 17.2 per cent social charges, and a British friend tells you the social charges were unlawful and everyone is getting them back. The truth is narrower and, for most British sellers, better than the rumour mill suggests. Since 1 January 2019 France exempts sellers who belong to a foreign social security scheme inside the European Economic Area or Switzerland from the two biggest social charges, and the French tax administration confirms that British residents keep that exemption after Brexit. What remains is a 7.5 per cent solidarity levy. If your notaire withheld the full 17.2 per cent, the difference is reclaimable through a formal claim with a strict deadline. This guide explains what was taken from your sale price, the affiliation test that decides whether you get part of it back, and the exact procedure to claim or challenge, with the court decisions that drew the line for third-country sellers.<\/p>\n
When a non-resident sells French property, the notaire collects two taxes at once on the official capital gains return, form 2048-IMM: the income tax levy of 19 per cent and the social charges, called prelevements sociaux. The income tax side is settled law. Article 200 B of the Code general des impots, the French tax code<\/a>, provides: “Les plus-values r\u00e9alis\u00e9es dans les conditions pr\u00e9vues aux articles 150 U \u00e0 150 UC sont impos\u00e9es au taux forfaitaire de 19 %.” And for non-resident individuals, article 244 bis A, III bis, of the tax code<\/a> states that “Toutefois, les personnes physiques, les associ\u00e9s personnes physiques de soci\u00e9t\u00e9s, groupements ou organismes dont les b\u00e9n\u00e9fices sont impos\u00e9s au nom des associ\u00e9s et les porteurs de parts, personnes physiques, de fonds de placement immobilier mentionn\u00e9s \u00e0 l’article 239 nonies sont soumis au pr\u00e9l\u00e8vement au taux de 19 %.” The same article catches you in the first place, since it applies to “a) Les personnes physiques qui ne sont pas fiscalement domicili\u00e9es en France au sens de l’article 4 B”, and it makes the notaire pay over the tax when the deed is registered, because “L’imp\u00f4t d\u00fb en application du pr\u00e9sent article est acquitt\u00e9 lors de l’enregistrement de l’acte ou, \u00e0 d\u00e9faut d’enregistrement, dans le mois suivant la cession, sous la responsabilit\u00e9 d’un repr\u00e9sentant \u00e9tabli en France, accr\u00e9dit\u00e9 par l’administration fiscale”. Our general guide to the whole computation is set out in the companion article British Owner Selling Your French House After Brexit: How the Plus-Value Is Taxed, What the Notaire Must File and How to Challenge Double Tax<\/a>.<\/p>\n The social charges are a different animal. They were designed for people inside the French social security system. Article L136-6 of the social security code<\/a> states: “Les personnes physiques fiscalement domicili\u00e9es en France au sens de l’article 4 B du code g\u00e9n\u00e9ral des imp\u00f4ts sont assujetties \u00e0 une contribution sur les revenus du patrimoine assise sur le montant net retenu pour l’\u00e9tablissement de l’imp\u00f4t sur le revenu”, and it lists in that base “e) Des plus-values, gains en capital et profits soumis \u00e0 l’imp\u00f4t sur le revenu”. So property gains sit squarely in the contribution base. The headline rate on a French sale is 17.2 per cent, made of three layers: the general social contribution known as CSG at 9.2 per cent, the contribution for repaying the social debt known as CRDS at 0.5 per cent, and a solidarity levy at 7.5 per cent. On a 63,000 euro taxable gain that is 10,836 euros withheld on top of the 19 per cent income tax. The question this article answers is how much of that 17.2 per cent a British seller really owes.<\/p>\n For non-residents the administration states the position plainly on its international help pages: French-source real property income and capital gains of non-residents are subject to these levies. But the same page immediately gives the way out. Since 1 January 2019, individuals who belong to a compulsory social security scheme outside France, in a European Economic Area state or Switzerland, are exempt from the CSG and the CRDS. And the page adds the sentence that matters for you: although the United Kingdom left the European Union on 1 January 2021, British residents keep this exemption. Only the 7.5 per cent solidarity levy remains due. In other words, a British seller affiliated to the British scheme should pay 7.5 per cent, not 17.2 per cent, on the gain. If the notaire withheld the full rate, the 9.7 point difference, CSG plus CRDS, is an overpayment you can reclaim. On that same 63,000 euro gain the reclaim is worth about 6,111 euros, before late-payment interest.<\/p>\n The exemption turns on one test: where are you affiliated for social security, and was that affiliation effective when it counts. The administration requires affiliation to be effective on 31 December of the year the income was received. A British seller who lived in the United Kingdom all year and paid National Insurance there meets the test. A British seller who moved mid-year needs to check the exact date. The proof is documentary: an affiliation certificate, an S1 form where relevant, or a National Insurance record, plus the French tax notice showing the charges paid.<\/p>\n The legal foundation is the de Ruyter line of cases. On 26 February 2015 the Court of Justice of the European Union, in case C-623\/13, Ministre de l’economie et des finances v Gerard de Ruyter, held that French capital levies which help fund compulsory social security schemes fall inside the European social security coordination rules and therefore obey the single-legislation principle: a person covered by those rules answers to only one member state’s scheme. The Paris administrative court of appeal summarised the rule this way: “les personnes auxquelles le r\u00e8glement est applicable ne sont soumises qu’\u00e0 la l\u00e9gislation d’un seul Etat membre”, meaning persons covered by the regulation are subject to the legislation of only one member state. France drew the consequence in October 2015 press notices announcing refunds, and from 1 January 2019 it wrote the CSG and CRDS exemption for EEA and Swiss affiliates into the routine system. The full reasoning is quoted in CAA Paris, 7 November 2019, No 18PA03007<\/a>, a case about two sisters in Singapore and the United States who sold a Paris flat and claimed back 20,436 euros of social charges.<\/p>\n That Paris case is the one British sellers must read carefully, because the sisters lost, and the reason defines your position. The court held in CAA Paris, 7 November 2019, No 18PA03007<\/a>: “Mmes C… et B… A…, qui sont domicili\u00e9es respectivement \u00e0 Singapour et aux Etats-Unis, ne justifient pas de leur affiliation \u00e0 un r\u00e9gime l\u00e9gal de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale d’un Etat membre de l’Union europ\u00e9enne ou de l’Espace \u00e9conomique europ\u00e9en.” They could not show affiliation to a legal social security scheme of a Union or EEA state, so they could not use the de Ruyter reading. The court went further and shut the free-movement-of-capital argument in CAA Paris, 7 November 2019, No 18PA03007<\/a>: “Il s’ensuit que la circonstance qu’une personne affili\u00e9e \u00e0 un r\u00e9gime de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale d’un Etat tiers \u00e0 l’Union europ\u00e9enne, autre que les Etats membres de l’Espace \u00e9conomique europ\u00e9en ou la Suisse soit soumise, comme les personnes affili\u00e9es \u00e0 la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale en France, aux pr\u00e9l\u00e8vements sur les revenus du capital pr\u00e9vus par la l\u00e9gislation fran\u00e7aise entrant dans le champ du r\u00e8glement du 29 avril 2004, alors qu’une personne relevant d’un r\u00e9gime de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale d’un Etat membre autre que la France ne peut, compte tenu des dispositions de ce r\u00e8glement, y \u00eatre soumise, ne constitue pas une restriction aux mouvements de capitaux en provenance ou \u00e0 destination des pays tiers, au sens de l’article 63 du trait\u00e9 sur le fonctionnement de l’Union europ\u00e9enne.”<\/p>\n The Conseil d’Etat, France’s supreme administrative court, confirmed the same boundary for third-country affiliates in the Dreyer litigation. Asked whether excluding third-country affiliates from the refunds breached the free movement of capital, the Court of Justice answered on 18 January 2018, case C-45\/17, that articles 63 and 65 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union do not block France from charging capital levies to a French national living in and affiliated in a third country outside the EEA and Switzerland, even though Union affiliates in another member state are exempt. The Conseil d’Etat applied that answer on 5 March 2018, case number 397881: “les articles 63 et 65 du trait\u00e9 sur le fonctionnement de l’Union europ\u00e9enne doivent \u00eatre interpr\u00e9t\u00e9s en ce sens qu’ils ne s’opposent pas \u00e0 la l\u00e9gislation d’un Etat membre, telle que la l\u00e9gislation fran\u00e7aise, en vertu de laquelle un ressortissant de cet Etat membre, qui r\u00e9side dans un Etat tiers autre qu’un Etat membre de l’Espace \u00e9conomique europ\u00e9en ou la Suisse, et qui y est affili\u00e9 \u00e0 un r\u00e9gime de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale, est soumis, dans cet Etat membre, \u00e0 des pr\u00e9l\u00e8vements sur les revenus du capital au titre d’une cotisation au r\u00e9gime de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale instaur\u00e9 par celui-ci, alors qu’un ressortissant de l’Union relevant d’un r\u00e9gime de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale d’un autre Etat membre en est exon\u00e9r\u00e9 en raison du principe de l’unicit\u00e9 de la l\u00e9gislation applicable en mati\u00e8re de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale en vertu de l’article 11 du r\u00e8glement (CE) n\u00b0 883\/2004 du Parlement europ\u00e9en et du Conseil, du 29 avril 2004, portant sur la coordination des syst\u00e8mes de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale”. The decision is published at Conseil d’Etat, 8th and 3rd Chambers sitting together, 5 March 2018, No 397881<\/a>. It added that the press notices calling back the refunds for EEA and Swiss affiliates simply restate French tax law as interpreted by the courts: “les communiqu\u00e9s attaqu\u00e9s, qui rappellent la r\u00e8gle pos\u00e9e par la loi fiscale fran\u00e7aise, telle qu’interpr\u00e9t\u00e9e par la jurisprudence du Conseil d’Etat, m\u00e9conna\u00eetraient le principe de libert\u00e9 de circulation des capitaux garanti par l’article 63 du trait\u00e9 sur le fonctionnement de l’Union europ\u00e9enne ne peut qu’\u00eatre \u00e9cart\u00e9”, and it rejected the annulment claims in its operative part: “Les conclusions de la requ\u00eate tendant \u00e0 l’annulation pour exc\u00e8s de pouvoir des communiqu\u00e9s de presse attaqu\u00e9s, en tant qu’ils excluent du champ du remboursement qu’ils pr\u00e9voient les redevables affili\u00e9s \u00e0 la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale dans un Etat autre que les Etats membres de l’Union europ\u00e9enne, les Etats membres de l’Espace \u00e9conomique europ\u00e9en ou la Suisse, sont rejet\u00e9es, ainsi que les conclusions aux fins d’injonction correspondantes.”<\/p>\n Where does that leave a British seller after Brexit. Three profiles, three answers. First, you live in the United Kingdom and belong to the British scheme. European case law alone would not save you, since the United Kingdom is now a third country outside the EEA, exactly like Singapore or the United States in the cases above. But French domestic practice does: the tax administration expressly keeps the CSG and CRDS exemption for British residents, so you owe only the 7.5 per cent solidarity levy. That administrative position is your reclaim ticket. Second, you live in France and belong to the French scheme, through salaried work, self-employment or PUMA, the universal health cover. You are inside the French system, so the full 17.2 per cent is lawfully due and there is nothing to reclaim. Third, you live in another EEA state, Spain or Portugal for example, and belong to its scheme while selling a French holiday home. The de Ruyter rule applies to you directly, and you claim the same CSG and CRDS exemption as before Brexit. A fourth situation needs individual advice: United Kingdom pensioners settled in France with an S1 healthcare certificate, whose competent state for social security purposes may still be the United Kingdom. Do not guess that one; take advice with the S1 and the affiliation record in hand.<\/p>\n One more charge survives every profile and should not be challenged: the solidarity levy itself. The Paris court examined it separately and upheld it, noting that it is established as “Un pr\u00e9l\u00e8vement de solidarit\u00e9 sur les revenus du patrimoine mentionn\u00e9s \u00e0 l’article L. 136-6 du Code de la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale”, and that none of the benefits it finances falls inside the European coordination regulation, so neither the single-legislation rule nor the ban on double contributions touches it. Budget your reclaim accordingly, following CAA Paris, 7 November 2019, No 18PA03007<\/a>: the prize is the CSG plus CRDS slice, 9.7 points, never the full 17.2.<\/p>\n If you have not yet filed, claim the exemption on the return itself. The administration instructs sellers to tick box 8SH for the first declarant, 8SI for the second, in section 8 of return 2042-C, and to attach proof of affiliation. Where only one spouse qualifies, the return must split the amounts so the exemption covers only that spouse’s share. Tell your notaire before completion day that you will claim the exemption: a notaire who knows the file can adjust the 2048-IMM computation or at least warn you that the full 17.2 per cent will be withheld and reclaimed later. Notaires withhold first and ask questions later, so expect the reclaim route even with a clean file.<\/p>\n If the full 17.2 per cent was already withheld, file an adjustment request, called a reclamation. Article L190 of the Livre des procedures fiscales, the tax procedure code<\/a>, opens the door: “Les r\u00e9clamations relatives aux imp\u00f4ts, contributions, droits, taxes, redevances, soultes et p\u00e9nalit\u00e9s de toute nature, \u00e9tablis ou recouvr\u00e9s par les agents de l’administration, rel\u00e8vent de la juridiction contentieuse lorsqu’elles tendent \u00e0 obtenir soit la r\u00e9paration d’erreurs commises dans l’assiette ou le calcul des impositions, soit le b\u00e9n\u00e9fice d’un droit r\u00e9sultant d’une disposition l\u00e9gislative ou r\u00e9glementaire.” An excessive CSG and CRDS charge collected from an exempt British affiliate is exactly an error in the calculation that this article lets you correct. And article R*190-1 of the procedure code<\/a> tells you where to send it: “Le contribuable qui d\u00e9sire contester tout ou partie d’un imp\u00f4t qui le concerne doit d’abord adresser une r\u00e9clamation au service territorial, selon le cas, de la direction g\u00e9n\u00e9rale des finances publiques ou de la direction g\u00e9n\u00e9rale des douanes et droits indirects dont d\u00e9pend le lieu de l’imposition.” For a seller living abroad that is the non-residents tax office, the Service des Impots des Particuliers Non-Residents, preferably through the secure messaging of your personal account on impots.gouv.fr, which guarantees receipt without chasing the department afterwards.<\/p>\n The deadline is the part sellers get wrong. Article R*196-1 of the procedure code<\/a> provides: “Pour \u00eatre recevables, les r\u00e9clamations relatives aux imp\u00f4ts autres que les imp\u00f4ts directs locaux et les taxes annexes \u00e0 ces imp\u00f4ts, doivent \u00eatre pr\u00e9sent\u00e9es \u00e0 l’administration au plus tard le 31 d\u00e9cembre de la deuxi\u00e8me ann\u00e9e suivant celle, selon le cas : a) De la mise en recouvrement du r\u00f4le ou de la notification d’un avis de mise en recouvrement”. Sell in June 2026 and the claim must reach the office by 31 December 2028. A day late is fatal however strong the file, so calendar the date on completion day and file early. The administration warns that high volumes slow down processing of these refund requests, which is another reason to file months before the deadline rather than weeks.<\/p>\n Build the file as if it will go to court, because it might. Enclose the deed of sale with the completion date, the 2048-IMM return showing the 17.2 per cent withheld, the French tax notice carrying the charges, proof of British affiliation effective on 31 December of the sale year, such as a National Insurance record or an official affiliation certificate, and a one-page computation of the CSG plus CRDS slice claimed back with interest. State expressly that you seek discharge of the CSG and CRDS and refund with late-payment interest, and keep proof of sending. Ask for the whole excess in one claim rather than drip-feeding corrections.<\/p>\n A rejection, or six months of silence which counts as an implied rejection, sends you to the administrative court. Article L199 of the procedure code<\/a> states: “En mati\u00e8re d’imp\u00f4ts directs et de taxes sur le chiffre d’affaires ou de taxes assimil\u00e9es, les d\u00e9cisions rendues par l’administration sur les r\u00e9clamations contentieuses et qui ne donnent pas enti\u00e8re satisfaction aux int\u00e9ress\u00e9s peuvent \u00eatre port\u00e9es devant le tribunal administratif.” The competent court is the tribunal administratif for the property’s location, and the filing deadline is two months from the rejection notice. Ask the court for discharge of the CSG and CRDS, refund of the sums, and late-payment interest running from the claim. Attach the full paper trail plus the two decisions discussed above: the Conseil d’Etat of 5 March 2018 for the legal framework and the Paris court of appeal of 7 November 2019 for the method, distinguishing your British affiliation from the Singapore and United States affiliations that lost there.<\/p>\n Keep perspective on what the courts can and cannot give you. They can refund the CSG and CRDS slice with interest where the exemption was wrongly denied. They cannot refund the 7.5 per cent solidarity levy, which the courts have upheld, and they cannot cut the 19 per cent income tax below its lawful rate, although any levy above 19 per cent on an individual seller is unlawful under the free movement of capital, as the Conseil d’Etat held on 23 June 2022, case 445785, for a third-country seller in Nice. That decision is published at Conseil d’Etat, 9th Chamber, 23 June 2022, No 445785<\/a>. Frame the court application tightly around the CSG and CRDS excess instead of attacking the whole bill, and it reads as a serious technical claim rather than a protest.<\/p>\n Finally, fix the British side after any French refund. The United Kingdom gives its residents a credit for French tax paid on the same gain, capped at the British tax on that gain. When France refunds part of the social charges, the French tax taken into account shrinks, so the credit shrinks and a small balance of British tax may become due. Amend the Self Assessment return for the sale year, attach the French refund notice, and pay any balance before HM Revenue and Customs charges interest. The British guidance confirms the starting point: United Kingdom residents pay Capital Gains Tax when they dispose of overseas property, may also pay tax where the gain arose, and may claim relief if taxed twice, on the official GOV.UK page Selling overseas property<\/a>. Failing to adjust the British return after a French refund turns a victory in Paris into penalties in London.<\/p>\n The 17.2 per cent withheld on your French sale splits into two very different fates. The 7.5 per cent solidarity levy is yours to pay in every case, and no court will remove it. The 9.7 points of CSG and CRDS are yours to keep or reclaim whenever you belonged to the British, EEA or Swiss scheme on 31 December of the sale year, because the French administration expressly extends the exemption to British residents after Brexit and the courts have confined the third-country refusal to genuinely third-country affiliates. The method is unglamorous but effective: tick the right boxes before filing, or file a documented adjustment claim with the non-residents office well before 31 December of the second following year, then take a refusal to the administrative court within two months with interest claimed, and finally tidy the British credit. The file that wins is the boring one, complete deeds, exact affiliation dates, clean arithmetic, and it is assembled on completion day, not the week the deadline expires.<\/p>\n Our firm offers a telephone consultation within 48 hours with an avocat of the chambers, for a rapid review of your 2048-IMM computation, your affiliation position and your reclaim deadline. Call +33 6 46 60 58 22<\/a> or write through our contact page<\/a> with your deed of sale, your French tax notice and your affiliation proof attached.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" British seller hit with 17.2 percent French social charges on your house sale? Why you likely owe only 7.5 percent, the affiliation test from the Dreyer cases, and how to reclaim the excess before the deadline.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":251031309,"featured_media":16557,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kj_source_type":"","_kj_official_id":"","_kj_official_url":"","_kj_judilibre_id":"","_kj_jur":"","_kj_lieu":"","_kj_chambre":"","_kj_rg":"","_kj_date":"","activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":4,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"anyone","activitypub_status":"federated","footnotes":""},"categories":[80312,80314],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2122252","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-british-desk","category-decryptage"],"yoast_head":"\nB. The affiliation test that decides whether you get the CSG and CRDS back<\/h3>\n
II. How to claim the exemption or reclaim the excess<\/h2>\n
A. At filing time and after: boxes, offices, papers and the deadline that kills late claims<\/h3>\n
B. If the office says no: the court, the interest, and fixing the British side<\/h3>\n
Conclusion<\/h2>\n
Need a quick opinion on your case<\/h2>\n