{"id":2123923,"date":"2026-09-18T09:04:06","date_gmt":"2026-09-18T07:04:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/"},"modified":"2026-09-18T09:04:06","modified_gmt":"2026-09-18T07:04:06","slug":"foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/","title":{"rendered":"Foreign Owner of a French Company: Beneficial Owner (RBE) Filing, Court Injunction and How to Stop a Strike-Off"},"content":{"rendered":"

You formed a French SAS (soci\u00e9t\u00e9 par actions simplifi\u00e9e, a simplified joint-stock company) or SARL (soci\u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e0 responsabilit\u00e9 limit\u00e9e, a private limited company), or you bought the shares of one. The shareholders sit in London, Delaware, Dubai or Singapore. The pr\u00e9sident (chair of a SAS) or g\u00e9rant (manager of a SARL) lives abroad. Then the file stalls. The INPI (Institut national de la propri\u00e9t\u00e9 industrielle, the French industrial-property office that now runs the one-stop shop for company filings, the Guichet unique) rejects the beneficial-owner section. A French bank freezes the account because the registre des b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaires effectifs (RBE, the beneficial-owner register) does not match its KYC file. Or a registered letter from the greffe (the registry of the commercial court) lands at a Paris domiciliation address nobody checks, and three months later the company is struck off the registre du commerce et des soci\u00e9t\u00e9s (RCS, the trade and companies register). This article is written for that foreign owner. It explains who French law treats as a b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif (beneficial owner), how to declare and update the RBE from abroad, what the president of the commercial court can order under an injunction with a daily penalty (astreinte), how the criminal fine now stands at 200,000 euros since 28 May 2026, and how to stop or reverse a strike-off. It complements our general guide on setting up a company in France as a foreign founder<\/a>. Thresholds, holding chains and the notification of court orders turn on the documents of the file; the texts below are those in force on 18 September 2026.<\/p>\n

I. Who is the beneficial owner of a French company when the shareholders live abroad<\/h2>\n

A. How to identify the b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif through a foreign holding chain<\/h3>\n

French anti-money-laundering law does not look at the first company on the organisation chart. It looks for the natural person who stands at the end of the chain. Article L. 561-2-2 of the code mon\u00e9taire et financier<\/a> (the Monetary and Financial Code) states: \u00ab Pour l’application du pr\u00e9sent chapitre, le b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif est la ou les personnes physiques : 1\u00b0 Soit qui contr\u00f4lent en dernier lieu, directement ou indirectement, le client ; 2\u00b0 Soit pour laquelle une op\u00e9ration est ex\u00e9cut\u00e9e ou une activit\u00e9 exerc\u00e9e. \u00bb A company, a trust or a Delaware LLC is never itself the beneficial owner. Only a human being is.<\/p>\n

For a company, the implementing rule is article R. 561-1 of the same code<\/a>: \u00ab Lorsque le client d’une des personnes mentionn\u00e9es \u00e0 l’article L. 561-2 est une soci\u00e9t\u00e9, on entend par b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif, au sens du 1\u00b0 de l’article L. 561-2-2 , la ou les personnes physiques qui soit d\u00e9tiennent, directement ou indirectement, plus de 25 % du capital ou des droits de vote de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9, soit exercent, par tout autre moyen, un pouvoir de contr\u00f4le sur la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 au sens des 3\u00b0 et 4\u00b0 du I de l’article L. 233-3 du code de commerce . \u00bb Two tests therefore sit side by side. The first is a bright line: more than 25 per cent of the capital or of the voting rights, held directly or through any number of foreign vehicles. The second is control by other means, defined by reference to article L. 233-3 of the code de commerce<\/a> (the Commercial Code). That article treats a person as controlling a company \u00ab 3\u00b0 Lorsqu’elle d\u00e9termine en fait, par les droits de vote dont elle dispose, les d\u00e9cisions dans les assembl\u00e9es g\u00e9n\u00e9rales de cette soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ; 4\u00b0 Lorsqu’elle est associ\u00e9e ou actionnaire de cette soci\u00e9t\u00e9 et dispose du pouvoir de nommer ou de r\u00e9voquer la majorit\u00e9 des membres des organes d’administration, de direction ou de surveillance de cette soci\u00e9t\u00e9. \u00bb A shareholders’ agreement that gives a 10 per cent investor a veto on the appointment of the pr\u00e9sident, or a right to name a majority of the board, can therefore make that investor a beneficial owner even though the 25 per cent line is not crossed.<\/p>\n

The look-through is mandatory. If a French SAS is owned 100 per cent by a British limited company, which is itself owned 60 per cent by one individual and 40 per cent by another, the individual who holds 60 per cent of the British parent holds, indirectly, 60 per cent of the French SAS. That person must be declared. The British company is a link in the chain, not a beneficial owner. If ten individuals each hold 10 per cent of the foreign parent, none of them crosses 25 per cent of the French company. The file then moves to the fallback in the second paragraph of article R. 561-1: when no natural person can be identified on the 25 per cent or control tests, and there is no suspicion of money laundering, the beneficial owner is the legal representative. For a SAS, article R. 561-1<\/a> names \u00ab Le pr\u00e9sident et, le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant, le directeur g\u00e9n\u00e9ral des soci\u00e9t\u00e9s par actions simplifi\u00e9es \u00bb. For a SARL it is the g\u00e9rant. If that pr\u00e9sident or g\u00e9rant is itself a company, the same article continues: \u00ab Si les repr\u00e9sentants l\u00e9gaux mentionn\u00e9s au a ou au d sont des personnes morales, le b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif est la ou les personnes physiques qui repr\u00e9sentent l\u00e9galement ces personnes morales. \u00bb A foreign corporate chair does not hide the human being who signs for it.<\/p>\n

Several people can be beneficial owners at once. Two spouses who each hold 50 per cent of a French SCI (soci\u00e9t\u00e9 civile immobili\u00e8re, a civil real-estate company) both cross the 25 per cent line. A US founder who holds 30 per cent of the French SAS and a US fund manager who, without that stake, holds a contractual power to appoint the majority of the management body, can both have to be declared: one on the capital test, the other on the control test. The INPI one-stop shop asks the declarant to state, for each person, the nature and the extent of the control, including the percentage of capital and of voting rights where the 25 per cent test is used. Joint ownership of shares is a frequent trap for families: each beneficial owner must declare the whole joint holding, so the percentages displayed on the form can exceed 100 per cent. That is not a defect; it is how the INPI itself describes the check it runs on the Guichet unique.<\/p>\n

The duty to obtain and keep this information is not optional and it is not limited to large groups. Article L. 561-45-1 of the code mon\u00e9taire et financier<\/a> provides: \u00ab Sont tenus d’obtenir et de conserver des informations exactes et actualis\u00e9es sur leurs b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaires effectifs d\u00e9finis \u00e0 l’article L. 561-2-2 : 1\u00b0 Lorsqu’elles sont \u00e9tablies sur le territoire fran\u00e7ais conform\u00e9ment \u00e0 l’article L. 123-11 du code de commerce, les soci\u00e9t\u00e9s et entit\u00e9s mentionn\u00e9es aux 2\u00b0, 3\u00b0 et 5\u00b0 du I de l’article L. 123-1 du m\u00eame code \u00bb other than listed companies subject to equivalent transparency rules. In plain terms, a SAS, a SARL, a SA (soci\u00e9t\u00e9 anonyme, a public limited company) and a SCI with a registered office (si\u00e8ge social) in France must identify their beneficial owners, keep the file accurate, and hand the information to banks, notaries and other persons listed in article L. 561-2 when those persons run their own due diligence. The official service-public page, checked on 3 June 2026, also lists commercial companies whose seat is abroad but which have an \u00e9tablissement (place of business) in France, because those branches are themselves registered on the RCS. Listed companies on a regulated market in France or another EEA State are the main carve-out.<\/p>\n

The beneficial owner has a duty of his or her own. Article L. 561-45-2<\/a> states: \u00ab A la demande de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ou de l’entit\u00e9 mentionn\u00e9e aux 1\u00b0 \u00e0 4\u00b0 de l’article L. 561-45-1 , le b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif lui fournit toutes les informations n\u00e9cessaires au respect de l’obligation mentionn\u00e9e au premier alin\u00e9a du m\u00eame article. \u00bb If the foreign shareholder does not send a passport, a personal address and the description of the control within the time set by decree, or sends incomplete or wrong information, the company \u00ab peut saisir le pr\u00e9sident du tribunal statuant en r\u00e9f\u00e9r\u00e9 aux fins de voir ordonner, au besoin sous astreinte, la transmission de ces informations \u00bb. A pr\u00e9sident who lives in France and cannot extract a scan from a silent US shareholder is not without a court remedy. Conversely, a foreign beneficial owner who withholds the data faces the same criminal scale as a missing company filing, under article L. 574-6 of the code mon\u00e9taire et financier<\/a>: \u00ab Est puni des peines pr\u00e9vues \u00e0 l’article L. 574-5 le fait pour le b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif de ne pas transmettre \u00e0 la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ou l’entit\u00e9 les informations requises en application de l’article L. 561-45-2 dans les d\u00e9lais pr\u00e9vus par cet article ou de transmettre des informations inexactes ou incompl\u00e8tes. \u00bb<\/p>\n

What must be collected is set out in article R. 561-56<\/a>. For the company: name, legal form, address of the si\u00e8ge social and, where it exists, the unique identification number completed by \u00ab RCS \u00bb and the city of the greffe. For each beneficial owner: \u00ab Les nom, nom d’usage, pseudonyme, pr\u00e9noms, date et lieu de naissance, nationalit\u00e9, adresse personnelle de la ou des personnes physiques \u00bb ; the nature, methods and extent of the control, determined in accordance with articles R. 561-1, R. 561-2 or R. 561-3 ; and \u00ab La date \u00e0 laquelle la ou les personnes physiques sont devenues le b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif \u00bb. The personal address is the point that most often blocks a foreign file. A company service address, a lawyer’s chambers or a PO box is not the domicile personnel that the statute requires. Banks that read the RBE against their own KYC file will treat a mismatch as a freeze, not as a typing error. The same data now sit in the registre national des entreprises (RNE, the national business register) kept by the INPI, not only on a paper annex at the greffe.<\/p>\n

B. How to file and update the RBE on the INPI Guichet unique from abroad<\/h3>\n

The filing channel is no longer a CERFA dropped at the greffe. Article L. 561-46 of the code mon\u00e9taire et financier<\/a>, in force with a deferred repeal running to 1 January 2029, provides: \u00ab Les soci\u00e9t\u00e9s et entit\u00e9s mentionn\u00e9es au 1\u00b0 de l’article L. 561-45-1 , les placements collectifs mentionn\u00e9s au 2\u00b0 du m\u00eame article L. 561-45-1 ou leurs soci\u00e9t\u00e9s de gestion, lorsqu’ils ne sont pas eux-m\u00eames une soci\u00e9t\u00e9, et les groupements d’int\u00e9r\u00eat \u00e9conomique mentionn\u00e9s au 4\u00b0 dudit article L. 561-45-1 d\u00e9clarent au registre du commerce et des soci\u00e9t\u00e9s, par l’interm\u00e9diaire de l’organisme mentionn\u00e9 au deuxi\u00e8me alin\u00e9a de l’article L. 123-33 du code de commerce, les informations relatives aux b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaires effectifs. Ces informations portent sur les \u00e9l\u00e9ments d’identification et le domicile personnel de ces b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaires ainsi que sur les modalit\u00e9s du contr\u00f4le que ces derniers exercent sur la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ou l’entit\u00e9. \u00bb The \u00ab organisme unique \u00bb of article L. 123-33 of the code de commerce<\/a> is the Guichet unique operated by the INPI: \u00ab Ce dossier est d\u00e9pos\u00e9 par voie \u00e9lectronique aupr\u00e8s d’un organisme unique d\u00e9sign\u00e9 \u00e0 cet effet. \u00bb A foreign founder who still tries to file a paper M’BE form at the greffe is on the wrong track.<\/p>\n

Article R. 561-55<\/a> splits the calendar in two. At incorporation, \u00ab Les informations relatives aux b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaires effectifs mentionn\u00e9es au premier alin\u00e9a de l’article L. 561-46 sont d\u00e9clar\u00e9es au greffe du tribunal de commerce lors de la demande d’immatriculation au registre du commerce et des soci\u00e9t\u00e9s pr\u00e9sent\u00e9e par la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ou l’entit\u00e9 immatricul\u00e9e par l’interm\u00e9diaire de l’organisme unique mentionn\u00e9 \u00e0 l\u2019 article R. 123-1 du code de commerce . \u00bb After incorporation, \u00ab La soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ou l’entit\u00e9 immatricul\u00e9e demande une inscription modificative dans les trente jours suivant tout fait ou acte rendant n\u00e9cessaire la rectification ou le compl\u00e9ment des informations d\u00e9clar\u00e9es. \u00bb Thirty days is not a courtesy. A share transfer that takes a US founder through the 25 per cent line, a move of personal address, a change of name after marriage, the appointment of a new pr\u00e9sident who becomes the fallback beneficial owner, or the arrival of a new investor with a right to appoint the board, each starts that clock. The official service-public fiche, verified on 3 June 2026, prices the formality at 19.33 euros and lists the same data set as article R. 561-56. The INPI screen is labelled \u00ab b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaires effectifs \u00bb ; the declarant clicks \u00ab ajouter un b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif \u00bb and must specify the type of control. Where the control is the holding of more than 25 per cent of the capital or of the voting rights, the percentage itself must be stated.<\/p>\n

From abroad, the practical sequence is mechanical and unforgiving. First, draw the chain down to every natural person, with percentages at each layer, including usufruct (usufruit) and bare ownership (nue-propri\u00e9t\u00e9) where a French family split exists. Second, collect a passport or national identity document, a proof of personal address in the country of residence, and a short note of the date on which that person became a beneficial owner. Third, file through the Guichet unique with an electronic signature; a French lawyer, accountant or formalist can be given a mandate if the foreign pr\u00e9sident cannot obtain an INPI account. Fourth, keep the receipt. The greffier (registrar) does not merely store the form. Article L. 561-47<\/a> now says: \u00ab Le greffier du tribunal de commerce v\u00e9rifie que les informations relatives au b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif mentionn\u00e9es au premier alin\u00e9a de L. 561-46 sont compl\u00e8tes et conformes aux dispositions l\u00e9gislatives et r\u00e9glementaires, correspondent aux pi\u00e8ces justificatives et pi\u00e8ces d\u00e9pos\u00e9es en annexe et sont compatibles, dans le cas d’une demande de modification ou de radiation, avec l’\u00e9tat du dossier. \u00bb A rejection for occupancy of the si\u00e8ge social, which we have already treated in a separate article on INPI refusals of the formation file<\/a>, is a different defect. A rejection of the RBE section is usually a missing personal address, a percentage that does not match the articles, a corporate shareholder left in the form as if it were a human being, or a fallback pr\u00e9sident declared while a 30 per cent natural person sits in the chain.<\/p>\n

Access to the register is no longer public. After the Court of Justice of the European Union restricted open access to beneficial-owner registers, article L. 561-46 itself lists who may read the full file without restriction: the company for the data it declared, the natural persons declared as beneficial owners for their own line, and a closed list of authorities (courts, Tracfin, customs, tax, police, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, and others). Persons who only claim a \u00ab legitimate interest \u00bb follow a separate request to the INPI or to the greffe. A foreign competitor cannot, as a rule, download the home address of your founder from an open website. Banks and other article L. 561-2 persons remain entitled to the data in the course of their vigilance. That is why a mismatch between the RBE and the bank file still freezes the account, a problem we have described in the article on a French bank account refused to a foreign-owned SAS<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Kbis (the official extract of the RCS) is not the RBE. Obtaining a Kbis after incorporation does not prove that the beneficial-owner filing is complete or current. The RNE entry kept by the INPI is the place where the beneficial-owner data now live. A foreign owner who asks only \u00ab do we have a Kbis? \u00bb and never opens the b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaires effectifs tab on the Guichet unique is asking the wrong question. The right question is whether every natural person who crosses the 25 per cent line or who holds control under article L. 233-3 is named, with a personal address, a date of becoming beneficial owner, and a percentage or a description of control that can be reconciled with the articles and with any shareholders’ agreement.<\/p>\n

II. What to do if the filing is missing, rejected or the commercial court orders a declaration<\/h2>\n

A. How to contest a court injunction, a daily penalty and the 200,000-euro fine<\/h3>\n

When the filing is absent, late or wrong, the president of the commercial court (or, in the cities where it has replaced that court, the tribunal des activit\u00e9s \u00e9conomiques, TAE) can issue an injunction. Article L. 561-48<\/a> provides: \u00ab Le pr\u00e9sident du tribunal, d’office ou sur requ\u00eate du procureur de la R\u00e9publique ou de toute personne justifiant y avoir int\u00e9r\u00eat, peut enjoindre, au besoin sous astreinte, \u00e0 toute soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ou entit\u00e9 juridique mentionn\u00e9e au premier alin\u00e9a de l’article L. 561-46 de proc\u00e9der ou faire proc\u00e9der soit aux d\u00e9clarations des informations relatives au b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif, soit \u00e0 la rectification de ces informations lorsqu’elles sont inexactes ou incompl\u00e8tes. \u00bb The public prosecutor is a frequent applicant. A bank, a co-shareholder or a creditor who justifies an interest can also apply. The order sets a time-limit and, very often, a daily penalty. Article R. 561-62<\/a> is explicit: \u00ab Lorsque le pr\u00e9sident du tribunal enjoint \u00e0 une soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ou \u00e0 une entit\u00e9 juridique de proc\u00e9der ou faire proc\u00e9der aux d\u00e9clarations ou aux rectifications des informations relatives au b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif, il rend une ordonnance fixant le d\u00e9lai d’ex\u00e9cution et, le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant, le taux de l’astreinte. Elle n’est pas susceptible de recours. \u00bb<\/p>\n

That last sentence is the trap. The Cour de cassation (the highest court in the French judicial order) has now said, in a decision published in the Bulletin, that an appeal against the injunction itself is in principle irreceivable. In Cass. com., 17 December 2025, n\u00b0 24-22.646<\/a>, a SARL named Le Puits des foug\u00e8res had already, on its own case, filed its beneficial owners, yet the president of the commercial court still ordered it to file within one month under a penalty of 100 euros per day. The company appealed. The Court held: \u00ab Il r\u00e9sulte de l’article R. 561-62 du code mon\u00e9taire et financier que la d\u00e9cision par laquelle le pr\u00e9sident d’un tribunal ordonne \u00e0 une soci\u00e9t\u00e9 de d\u00e9clarer au registre du commerce et des soci\u00e9t\u00e9s ses b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaires effectifs n’est pas susceptible de recours. Il n’est d\u00e9rog\u00e9 \u00e0 cette r\u00e8gle, comme \u00e0 toute autre r\u00e8gle interdisant ou diff\u00e9rant un recours, qu’en cas d’exc\u00e8s de pouvoir. \u00bb And: \u00ab Un mal jug\u00e9 par erreur de droit ou de fait ne constitue pas un exc\u00e8s de pouvoir. \u00bb Even if the injunction was issued in error because the company was already up to date, that error is not excess of power. The appeal was dismissed. For a foreign owner, the lesson is brutal: do not spend the thirty-day window writing an appeal against the injunction. File or correct the RBE, and use the other routes the case law actually opens.<\/p>\n

Those other routes exist. In Cass. com., 18 September 2024, n\u00b0 22-20.771<\/a>, also published in the Bulletin, a SAS named It Outsourcing had been ordered, at the request of the public prosecutor, to declare its beneficial owners, then condemned to pay 3,000 euros to the Treasury when the greffier recorded non-performance. The Court recalled the text of article L. 561-48 and then stated: \u00ab Les entit\u00e9s auxquelles il est fait une telle injonction disposent, en application des article 496, alin\u00e9a 2, et 497 du code de proc\u00e9dure civile, de la facult\u00e9 de demander au pr\u00e9sident du tribunal qui l’a rendue la r\u00e9tractation de son ordonnance. \u00bb Retraction before the same president is the ordinary remedy against the injunction, not an appeal. The company may also challenge the later decision that liquidates the daily penalty. The 2024 Court added that these limits on access to a judge, justified by the proper administration of justice, are proportionate to the fight against money laundering and do not empty the right of its substance.<\/p>\n

Notification is where foreign-owned companies most often win. Article R. 561-62<\/a> continues: \u00ab Le greffier notifie l’ordonnance \u00e0 la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ou \u00e0 l’entit\u00e9 juridique et, le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant, au requ\u00e9rant, par lettre recommand\u00e9e avec demande d’avis de r\u00e9ception. \u00bb The same article adds: \u00ab Si la lettre est retourn\u00e9e avec une mention pr\u00e9cisant qu’elle n’a pas \u00e9t\u00e9 r\u00e9clam\u00e9e par son destinataire, le greffier invite le requ\u00e9rant \u00e0 proc\u00e9der par voie de signification ou, en cas de saisine d’office, fait signifier l’ordonnance. \u00bb And: \u00ab Si la lettre est retourn\u00e9e avec une mention pr\u00e9cisant que le destinataire est inconnu \u00e0 l’adresse indiqu\u00e9e, l’affaire est retir\u00e9e du r\u00f4le par le pr\u00e9sident qui en informe le minist\u00e8re public. \u00bb In the 2024 It Outsourcing decision the president had liquidated the penalty by merely citing the greffier’s proc\u00e8s-verbal of non-performance. The Cour de cassation<\/a> quashed: \u00ab En se d\u00e9terminant ainsi, sans rechercher, comme il lui incombait, si l’ordonnance portant injonction avait \u00e9t\u00e9 r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement notifi\u00e9e \u00e0 la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 It Outsourcing, le pr\u00e9sident du tribunal de commerce, qui n’a pas mis la Cour de cassation en mesure d’exercer son contr\u00f4le sur la r\u00e9gularit\u00e9 de la d\u00e9cision de liquidation de l’astreinte, n’a pas donn\u00e9 de base l\u00e9gale \u00e0 sa d\u00e9cision. \u00bb On 3 September 2026 the third civil chamber reached the same result for a SCI, in Cass. 3e civ., 3 September 2026, n\u00b0 24-21.200<\/a>. The SCI Cobar had been ordered, again at the request of the public prosecutor, to declare its beneficial owners; the president of the commercial court of Marseille then liquidated a 3,000-euro penalty. That Court held: \u00ab En se d\u00e9terminant ainsi, sans rechercher, comme il lui incombait, si l’ordonnance portant injonction avait \u00e9t\u00e9 r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement notifi\u00e9e \u00e0 la SCI, le pr\u00e9sident du tribunal de commerce, qui n’a pas mis la Cour de cassation en mesure d’exercer son contr\u00f4le sur la r\u00e9gularit\u00e9 de la d\u00e9cision de liquidation de l’astreinte, n’a pas donn\u00e9 de base l\u00e9gale \u00e0 sa d\u00e9cision. \u00bb A foreign owner whose si\u00e8ge social is a domiciliation company that does not collect registered mail should not ignore the injunction; the first move is still to file. The second move, if a penalty has already been liquidated, is to check whether the greffe ever completed a valid notification or a bailiff’s service (signification). That defect is what the Cour de cassation actually sanctions.<\/p>\n

Criminal law is a separate track, and it changed on 28 May 2026. Article L. 574-5 of the code mon\u00e9taire et financier<\/a>, in the version in force since that date, provides: \u00ab Est puni d’une amende de 200 000 euros le fait de ne pas fournir aux personnes mentionn\u00e9es \u00e0 l’ article L. 561-2 , dans le cadre des mesures de vigilance pr\u00e9vues \u00e0 la section 3 du chapitre Ier du titre VI , ou de ne pas d\u00e9clarer au registre du commerce et des soci\u00e9t\u00e9s ou, le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant, dans un registre mentionn\u00e9 \u00e0 l’article L. 561-46-1 les informations relatives aux b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaires effectifs requises en application du premier alin\u00e9a de l’ article L. 561-46 ou de l’ article L. 561-46-1 , ou de d\u00e9clarer des informations inexactes ou incompl\u00e8tes. \u00bb The six-month prison sentence that used to sit next to a 7,500-euro fine is no longer in that article. Natural persons convicted of the offence also face a ban on managing companies under article 131-27 of the criminal code and a partial loss of civic rights under article 131-26, 2\u00b0. For the company itself, article 131-38 of the code p\u00e9nal<\/a> multiplies the fine: \u00ab Le taux maximum de l’amende applicable aux personnes morales est \u00e9gal au quintuple de celui pr\u00e9vu pour les personnes physiques par la loi qui r\u00e9prime l’infraction. \u00bb Five times 200,000 euros is 1,000,000 euros, which is the figure now given by the official service-public page verified on 3 June 2026, together with complementary penalties (dissolution, judicial supervision, closure of establishments, exclusion from public contracts). Offences committed before 28 May 2026 remain under the former scale unless a later, more favourable rule applies to a conviction that is not yet final. Do not confuse this criminal fine with the 3,000-euro astreinte liquidations in the 2024 and 2026 Cour de cassation cases: those sums were civil penalties for disobeying an injunction, payable to the Treasury, not the criminal sentence of article L. 574-5.<\/p>\n

B. How to stop or reverse a strike-off from the RCS after a three-month warning<\/h3>\n

Since the law of 13 June 2025, the greffier can strike the company off the RCS without waiting for a criminal court. Article L. 561-47<\/a>, after the verification duty already quoted, continues: \u00ab Lorsque le greffier constate qu’une soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ou une entit\u00e9 mentionn\u00e9e au 1\u00b0 de l’ article L. 561-45-1 du pr\u00e9sent code n’a pas d\u00e9clar\u00e9 au registre du commerce et des soci\u00e9t\u00e9s ou mis en conformit\u00e9 les informations relatives aux b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaires effectifs \u00e0 l’expiration d’un d\u00e9lai de trois mois \u00e0 compter d’une mise en demeure de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ou de l’entit\u00e9 par lettre recommand\u00e9e avec demande d’avis de r\u00e9ception adress\u00e9e \u00e0 son si\u00e8ge social, il peut proc\u00e9der \u00e0 sa radiation d’office dudit registre. Toute radiation d’office effectu\u00e9e en application du pr\u00e9sent article est port\u00e9e \u00e0 la connaissance du teneur du registre national des entreprises et du minist\u00e8re public. \u00bb Three months run from a formal notice sent by registered letter with advice of receipt to the si\u00e8ge social. If that address is a letterbox in the 8th arrondissement of Paris that nobody opens, the three months can expire without the founder in New York ever seeing the letter. The strike-off is then sent to the INPI as keeper of the RNE and to the public prosecutor.<\/p>\n

A second path to the same result sits in article L. 561-47-1<\/a>. Banks, notaries and other persons listed in article L. 561-2, and supervisory authorities acting in the normal course of their controls, \u00ab signalent au greffier du tribunal de commerce toute divergence qu’elles constatent entre les informations relatives aux b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaires effectifs mentionn\u00e9es \u00e0 l’ article L. 561-46 et les informations sur les b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaires effectifs dont elles disposent, y compris l’absence d’enregistrement de ces informations \u00bb. The greffier then serves a mise en demeure to regularise through the Guichet unique. \u00ab Si la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ou l’entit\u00e9 n’a pas d\u00e9f\u00e9r\u00e9 \u00e0 cette mise en demeure dans un d\u00e9lai de trois mois \u00e0 compter de sa r\u00e9ception, le greffier proc\u00e8de \u00e0 la radiation d’office de l’int\u00e9ress\u00e9e du registre du commerce et des soci\u00e9t\u00e9s. \u00bb A KYC mismatch reported by a French bank can therefore become a strike-off, not only an account freeze. Article L. 561-48<\/a> adds a third path: if the company does not obey the president’s injunction, \u00ab Lorsque la personne ne d\u00e9f\u00e8re pas \u00e0 l’injonction d\u00e9livr\u00e9e par le pr\u00e9sident, le greffier en avise le procureur de la R\u00e9publique et lui adresse une exp\u00e9dition de la d\u00e9cision. Il peut proc\u00e9der \u00e0 la radiation d’office du registre du commerce et des soci\u00e9t\u00e9s de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ou de l’entit\u00e9, dans un d\u00e9lai de trois mois \u00e0 compter de la notification de la d\u00e9cision. \u00bb The president may also appoint a mandataire (an agent) to complete the filing, who can obtain information from the statutory auditor if there is one.<\/p>\n

Strike-off is reversible if the file is corrected quickly. Article R. 561-65<\/a> provides: \u00ab Lorsqu’une personne a \u00e9t\u00e9 radi\u00e9e d’office en application des articles L. 561-47 , L. 561-47-1 ou L. 561-48 , elle peut, d\u00e8s lors qu’elle d\u00e9montre qu’elle a r\u00e9gularis\u00e9 sa situation, demander au greffier de rapporter cette radiation. Dans le d\u00e9lai de quinze jours \u00e0 compter de la demande, celui-ci proc\u00e8de au rapport ou remet une d\u00e9cision motiv\u00e9e de refus au demandeur contre r\u00e9c\u00e9piss\u00e9 ou la lui adresse par lettre recommand\u00e9e avec demande d’avis de r\u00e9ception. \u00bb If the greffier refuses, or stays silent for fifteen days, the applicant \u00ab peut saisir le pr\u00e9sident du tribunal du refus ou de l’absence de r\u00e9ponse du greffier, valant refus, dans les quinze jours \u00bb. Regularise first, then ask for the report of the radiation; a request without a corrected RBE will fail. Until the RCS line is restored, counterparties, banks and public buyers who check the Kbis will treat the company as struck off. Contracts, tenders and the opening of a second bank account all stop.<\/p>\n

For a company whose si\u00e8ge social is in Paris or elsewhere in \u00cele-de-France, the geography of the file is part of the defence. The injunction, the mise en demeure and the registered letters all go to the si\u00e8ge social, not to the founder’s flat in Kensington or Brooklyn. A domiciliation contract in Paris that does not organise the collection and scanning of registered mail is how the 2024 and 2026 notification cases are born. The competent greffe and the president of the court are those of the RCS registration: the Tribunal de commerce de Paris for a company registered in Paris, the commercial court or TAE of Nanterre, Bobigny, \u00c9vry or Pontoise for many suburban seats. A foreign owner who only instructs a London accountant, and never a person with authority to receive mail at the French si\u00e8ge, will discover the injunction after the astreinte has been liquidated or after the RNE already shows a radiation. The corrective sequence is the same wherever the court sits: obtain the Kbis and the Guichet unique history; identify every natural person under article R. 561-1; file the missing or corrective RBE within the thirty-day logic of article R. 561-55 even if that period has already expired; if an injunction has been issued, apply for retraction under articles 496 and 497 of the code of civil procedure rather than an appeal that article R. 561-62 shuts; if a penalty has been liquidated, check notification under article R. 561-62, paragraphs 4 and 5, in the terms sanctioned by the Cour de cassation in 2024 and again in September 2026; if a radiation has been entered, regularise and request the report under article R. 561-65 within the fifteen-day windows. None of those steps requires the founder to move to France. Each of them requires a live address in France that actually receives the greffe’s letters.<\/p>\n

Conclusion<\/h2>\n

A foreign-owned French company is not excused from the RBE because its shareholders live abroad, because its pr\u00e9sident is a foreign company, or because a Kbis has already been issued. The beneficial owner is a natural person who, directly or indirectly, holds more than 25 per cent of the capital or voting rights or who controls the company by other means under article L. 233-3 of the Commercial Code, and, failing that, the legal representative. The filing is made on the INPI Guichet unique, with a personal address and a description of control, at incorporation and again within thirty days of any change. Since 28 May 2026 the criminal fine for a missing or false declaration is 200,000 euros for a natural person and up to five times that sum for the company. Since June 2025 the greffier can strike the company off the RCS three months after a registered warning. The Cour de cassation accepts retraction of the injunction and censors the liquidation of a daily penalty where notification was not proved; it does not accept a full appeal against the injunction itself in the name of a mere error of fact. Draw the chain, file the humans, keep the si\u00e8ge social alive as a mail address, and treat a bank discrepancy or a greffe letter as a deadline, not as a misunderstanding. The cost of a complete RBE on the Guichet unique is a two-figure fee. The cost of ignoring it is a frozen account, a 200,000-euro criminal exposure, and a company that no longer exists on the RCS.<\/p>\n

Need a quick opinion on your case<\/h2>\n

A missing or rejected beneficial-owner filing, a court injunction or a strike-off from the RCS can be organised, contested or reversed only on the documents of your company and of the greffe. The firm offers a telephone consultation within 48 hours with a lawyer of the firm to read the Guichet unique history, the chain of control and any order served at the si\u00e8ge social in Paris or elsewhere in \u00cele-de-France. Call +33 6 46 60 58 22<\/a> or write through the contact page<\/a> with the Kbis, the INPI receipt and the court letter attached.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

If INPI rejects your beneficial-owner filing or the commercial court orders a declaration, here is who France treats as a b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif, how to file the RBE from abroad, and how to contest an injunction, a 200,000-euro fine or a strike-off.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":251031309,"featured_media":16370,"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":[80314,80313],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2123923","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-decryptage","category-doing-business-in-france"],"yoast_head":"\nForeign Owner of a French Company: Beneficial Owner (RBE) Filing, Court Injunction and How to Stop a Strike-Off - Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, Real Estate and Business Law Attorney in Paris<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Foreign Owner of a French Company: Beneficial Owner (RBE) Filing, Court Injunction and How to Stop a Strike-Off\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"If INPI rejects your beneficial-owner filing or the commercial court orders a declaration, here is who France treats as a b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif, how to file the RBE from abroad, and how to contest an injunction, a 200,000-euro fine or a strike-off.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, Real Estate and Business Law Attorney in Paris\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-09-18T07:04:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Kohen\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Kohen\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"27 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/18\\\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/18\\\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Kohen\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/6254a643e6239d803134a01c800381bd\"},\"headline\":\"Foreign Owner of a French Company: Beneficial Owner (RBE) Filing, Court Injunction and How to Stop a Strike-Off\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-18T07:04:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/18\\\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":5593,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/18\\\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/11\\\/ave-calvar-GQ7ejmoWJUY-unsplash.webp\",\"articleSection\":[\"D\u00e9cryptage\",\"Doing Business in France\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"citation\":\"Foreign Owner of a French Company: Beneficial Owner (RBE) Filing, Court Injunction and How to Stop a Strike-Off\",\"about\":[{\"@type\":\"Thing\",\"name\":\"D\u00e9cryptage\"},{\"@type\":\"Thing\",\"name\":\"Doing Business in France\"}],\"dateModified\":\"2026-09-18T07:04:06+00:00\",\"speakable\":{\"@type\":\"SpeakableSpecification\",\"cssSelector\":[\".article-content > p:first-of-type\"]}},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/18\\\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/18\\\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\\\/\",\"name\":\"Foreign Owner of a French Company: Beneficial Owner (RBE) Filing, Court Injunction and How to Stop a Strike-Off - Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, Real Estate and Business Law Attorney in Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/18\\\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/18\\\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/11\\\/ave-calvar-GQ7ejmoWJUY-unsplash.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-18T07:04:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/18\\\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/18\\\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/18\\\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/11\\\/ave-calvar-GQ7ejmoWJUY-unsplash.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/11\\\/ave-calvar-GQ7ejmoWJUY-unsplash.webp\",\"width\":7178,\"height\":4037},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/18\\\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Foreign Owner of a French Company: Beneficial Owner (RBE) Filing, Court Injunction and How to Stop a Strike-Off\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"description\":\"Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, attorney specialized in real estate and business law in Paris, advises and assists companies and individuals in their real estate, commercial and contractual transactions. He also handles real estate litigation and the resolution of complex commercial disputes.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/05\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/05\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"width\":2114,\"height\":1253,\"caption\":\"Kohen Avocats\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/6254a643e6239d803134a01c800381bd\",\"name\":\"Kohen\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/1c5e76ef76bbbfdd2b4da984e2bf2fa4056fd51a27d25ce2c332047f1dfd6e00?s=96&d=identicon&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/1c5e76ef76bbbfdd2b4da984e2bf2fa4056fd51a27d25ce2c332047f1dfd6e00?s=96&d=identicon&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/1c5e76ef76bbbfdd2b4da984e2bf2fa4056fd51a27d25ce2c332047f1dfd6e00?s=96&d=identicon&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Kohen\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.fr\\\/en\\\/author\\\/kohenmlk\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Foreign Owner of a French Company: Beneficial Owner (RBE) Filing, Court Injunction and How to Stop a Strike-Off - Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, Real Estate and Business Law Attorney in Paris","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Foreign Owner of a French Company: Beneficial Owner (RBE) Filing, Court Injunction and How to Stop a Strike-Off","og_description":"If INPI rejects your beneficial-owner filing or the commercial court orders a declaration, here is who France treats as a b\u00e9n\u00e9ficiaire effectif, how to file the RBE from abroad, and how to contest an injunction, a 200,000-euro fine or a strike-off.","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/","og_site_name":"Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, Real Estate and Business Law Attorney in Paris","article_published_time":"2026-09-18T07:04:06+00:00","author":"Kohen","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Kohen","Est. reading time":"27 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/"},"author":{"name":"Kohen","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/6254a643e6239d803134a01c800381bd"},"headline":"Foreign Owner of a French Company: Beneficial Owner (RBE) Filing, Court Injunction and How to Stop a Strike-Off","datePublished":"2026-09-18T07:04:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/"},"wordCount":5593,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/ave-calvar-GQ7ejmoWJUY-unsplash.webp","articleSection":["D\u00e9cryptage","Doing Business in France"],"inLanguage":"en-US","citation":"Foreign Owner of a French Company: Beneficial Owner (RBE) Filing, Court Injunction and How to Stop a Strike-Off","about":[{"@type":"Thing","name":"D\u00e9cryptage"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"Doing Business in France"}],"dateModified":"2026-09-18T07:04:06+00:00","speakable":{"@type":"SpeakableSpecification","cssSelector":[".article-content > p:first-of-type"]}},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/","name":"Foreign Owner of a French Company: Beneficial Owner (RBE) Filing, Court Injunction and How to Stop a Strike-Off - Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, Real Estate and Business Law Attorney in Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/ave-calvar-GQ7ejmoWJUY-unsplash.webp","datePublished":"2026-09-18T07:04:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/ave-calvar-GQ7ejmoWJUY-unsplash.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/ave-calvar-GQ7ejmoWJUY-unsplash.webp","width":7178,"height":4037},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/18\/foreign-owner-france-beneficial-owner-rbe-declare-injunction-strike-off-abroad\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Foreign Owner of a French Company: Beneficial Owner (RBE) Filing, Court Injunction and How to Stop a Strike-Off"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/","name":"Kohen Avocats","description":"Ma\u00eetre Reda Kohen, attorney specialized in real estate and business law in Paris, advises and assists companies and individuals in their real estate, commercial and contractual transactions. He also handles real estate litigation and the resolution of complex commercial disputes.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#organization","name":"Kohen Avocats","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/Logo-2-1.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/Logo-2-1.webp","width":2114,"height":1253,"caption":"Kohen Avocats"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/6254a643e6239d803134a01c800381bd","name":"Kohen","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/1c5e76ef76bbbfdd2b4da984e2bf2fa4056fd51a27d25ce2c332047f1dfd6e00?s=96&d=identicon&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/1c5e76ef76bbbfdd2b4da984e2bf2fa4056fd51a27d25ce2c332047f1dfd6e00?s=96&d=identicon&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/1c5e76ef76bbbfdd2b4da984e2bf2fa4056fd51a27d25ce2c332047f1dfd6e00?s=96&d=identicon&r=g","caption":"Kohen"},"url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/author\/kohenmlk\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2123923","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/251031309"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2123923"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2123923\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/16370"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2123923"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2123923"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2123923"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}