Since the end of free movement, a British graphic designer in Lyon, a consultant in Paris or a plumber in the Dordogne all face the same starting point: you are now a third-country national, and working for yourself in France requires a specific immigration status before it requires clients. The card that matters is the carte de s\u00e9jour temporaire portant la mention entrepreneur\/profession lib\u00e9rale, the temporary residence card marked entrepreneur\/self-employed person, and the business vehicle most newcomers choose is the auto-entrepreneur, the simplified sole-trader scheme with turnover-based social charges. Both halves cause refusals every week: prefectures reject cards for lack of economic viability or insufficient means, and newcomers register the wrong activity, breach a turnover ceiling or discover too late that turnover is not profit. This guide explains, in order, which long-stay visa and which card to apply for, how the auto-entrepreneur registration and its real cost work, why prefectures refuse these files, and exactly how to challenge a refusal and the obligation to leave France that usually comes with it. It is written for British readers, every French term is explained on first use, and every decisive legal statement is tied to the statute or the court decision it comes from.<\/p>\n
Since 1 January 2021 British citizens have needed a visa to settle in France, and the British government says so itself in its Living in France guidance, which directs Britons moving to France to French visa and residence rules rather than to any surviving European Union route. In practice this means the journey starts at the French consulate in the United Kingdom with a long-stay visa, in French a visa de long s\u00e9jour, and continues at the prefecture, the local office of the French state that issues residence cards, with an application for the entrepreneur\/profession lib\u00e9rale card. French law makes the visa a precondition: article L412-1 of the Code de l’entr\u00e9e et du s\u00e9jour des \u00e9trangers et du droit d’asile provides that<\/a> “Sous r\u00e9serve des engagements internationaux de la France et des exceptions pr\u00e9vues aux articles L. 412-2 et L. 412-3, la premi\u00e8re d\u00e9livrance d’une carte de s\u00e9jour temporaire ou d’une carte de s\u00e9jour pluriannuelle est subordonn\u00e9e \u00e0 la production par l’\u00e9tranger du visa de long s\u00e9jour mentionn\u00e9 aux 1\u00b0 ou 2\u00b0 de l’article L. 411-1.” A British freelancer who enters visa-free for ninety days and then asks for an entrepreneur card is therefore refused on that ground alone, however strong the business file, and the refusal can be accompanied by an order to leave. The narrow statutory exceptions concern people already lawfully resident under another status, not first-time arrivals from the United Kingdom, so the visa step cannot be skipped.<\/p>\n The card itself is defined by a short but demanding provision. Article L421-5 of the same code states that<\/a> “L’\u00e9tranger qui exerce une activit\u00e9 non salari\u00e9e, \u00e9conomiquement viable et dont il tire des moyens d’existence suffisants, dans le respect de la l\u00e9gislation en vigueur, se voit d\u00e9livrer une carte de s\u00e9jour temporaire portant la mention ” entrepreneur\/ profession lib\u00e9rale ” d’une dur\u00e9e maximale d’un an.” Three cumulative conditions appear in that single sentence, and each one generates case law: the activity must be genuinely non-salaried rather than disguised employment, it must be economically viable, meaning capable of lasting and developing, and it must provide sufficient means of subsistence. The official service-public.fr information page for this card confirms the administration’s reading: your activity must be economically viable, it must bring you sufficient means of subsistence, and it must match your qualifications or professional experience, as explained on the service-public.fr page for the carte de s\u00e9jour entrepreneur\/profession lib\u00e9rale<\/a>. A former marketing employee who declares a plumbing business with no training or experience therefore fails the third limb even with a healthy order book, while a qualified tradesperson with a thin file fails the second.<\/p>\n Registration comes next, and the statute points to it expressly. Article R421-7 provides that<\/a> “Les dispositions de l’article L. 421-5 sont applicables \u00e0 l’\u00e9tranger dont l’activit\u00e9 non salari\u00e9e n\u00e9cessite une immatriculation soit au Registre national des entreprises en tant qu’entreprise du secteur des m\u00e9tiers et de l’artisanat ou au Registre du commerce et des soci\u00e9t\u00e9s, soit \u00e0 l’Union de recouvrement des cotisations de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale et d’allocations familiales (URSSAF).” In plain terms, a craft or commercial activity is registered on the Registre national des entreprises, the single national business register that replaced the older separate registers, or the commercial court register, while a liberal, service or freelance activity is declared to URSSAF, the body that collects social contributions. Since January 2023 all filings pass through the Guichet unique, the one-stop online portal, and the prefecture checks that the registration exists and matches the activity described in the business file. A mismatch between the visa business plan, the registered activity code and the invoices actually issued is one of the commonest reasons files fail, because it undermines viability and lawful practice at once.<\/p>\n Two recent administrative developments tighten the file further. An order of 13 May 2026 now lists the documents the applicant must supply so that the administration can obtain an opinion on the economic viability of the self-employed activity, a list published at the current official list of supporting documents for the viability opinion<\/a>, and prefectures routinely seek that viability opinion before deciding. After a first year of lawful residence, the statute opens the door to a multi-year card: article L421-6 provides that<\/a> “A l’expiration de la dur\u00e9e de validit\u00e9 de cette carte, s’il continue \u00e0 en remplir les conditions de d\u00e9livrance, il b\u00e9n\u00e9ficie, \u00e0 sa demande, d’une carte de s\u00e9jour pluriannuelle portant la m\u00eame mention.” That upgrade also requires progress on the contrat d’int\u00e9gration r\u00e9publicaine, the republican integration contract signed at arrival, including attendance at prescribed training and a minimum level of French, because article L433-4 makes the multi-year card conditional on<\/a> assiduity at state-prescribed training, a language examination result above a set threshold and continuing compliance with the temporary card’s conditions. British applicants who treat year one as a formality and file no accounts, no tax return and no French courses therefore lose the renewal they assumed was automatic.<\/p>\n The auto-entrepreneur, formally the auto-entreprise, is not a company at all. URSSAF describes the entreprise individuelle as<\/a> a simplified form of business allowing a person to create and manage an activity in their own name without creating a company, and presents the auto-entreprise as a simplified form of that status, created to make setup and day-to-day management easier. Placed under the micro-entreprise tax regime and the micro-social scheme for contributions, it gives access to health cover, pension rights and training while keeping administration light. That description matters because it corrects three British misunderstandings at once: there is no separate legal person, no limited liability beyond the statutory separation of personal and business assets, and no salary from which tax is deducted at source. You invoice clients, you declare the turnover you actually cashed, and contributions and income tax are computed from that turnover. Company formation, with share capital, articles and a distinct legal person, belongs to a different procedure entirely; the auto-entrepreneur is the person trading, which is why it fits the entrepreneur card so naturally and why prefectures accept it as the vehicle for the activity the card authorises.<\/p>\n Turnover ceilings decide whether you may stay in the scheme. For income tax purposes article 50-0 of the Code g\u00e9n\u00e9ral des imp\u00f4ts provides that the regime applies where turnover<\/a> “n’exc\u00e8de pas, l’ann\u00e9e civile pr\u00e9c\u00e9dente ou la p\u00e9nulti\u00e8me ann\u00e9e : 1\u00b0 203 100 \u20ac s’il s’agit d’entreprises dont le commerce principal est de vendre des marchandises, objets, fournitures et denr\u00e9es \u00e0 emporter ou \u00e0 consommer sur place ou de fournir le logement”, with a lower ceiling of 83 600 euros for other businesses, essentially services and liberal professions, and a specific sub-ceiling for furnished tourist rentals. URSSAF applies the same thresholds on the social side: artisan, commercial and non-regulated liberal activities must keep total turnover within the sales ceiling and service turnover within the services ceiling, as confirmed for current revenues by the entreprendre.service-public.fr page on micro-entreprise turnover thresholds<\/a>. A British consultant billing 90 000 euros of services in a full calendar year therefore exits the scheme, while a builder selling goods and services must watch both ceilings together. The micro-entreprise then taxes a standard allowance against turnover rather than deducting real costs: 71 percent for sales of goods, 50 percent for most services and 30 percent for certain furnished rentals, with a minimum allowance of 305 euros. Those allowances look generous until you realise they are the only deduction, so a service business with heavy subcontracting or equipment costs can pay tax on money it never kept.<\/p>\n Social charges work the same turnover logic and surprise newcomers even more. Contributions are charged as a flat percentage of cashed turnover, with no deduction for fuel, materials, software, accountancy or rent, and the rate depends on the activity: roughly speaking, sales of goods sit near 12 percent while services and liberal professions sit in the low twenties, with exact rates published by URSSAF and adjusted periodically. A freelancer who invoices 40 000 euros of services therefore owes contributions in four figures several times a year even in a year when real profit is thin, and a zero-turnover quarter still requires a nil declaration, with penalties for late or missing filings. Income tax can be paid under the standard micro method, meaning the allowance is applied on the annual return, or under the optional versement lib\u00e9ratoire, a flat-rate payment collected alongside contributions each month or quarter, but the option is only open below a household income threshold and must be chosen deliberately. Health cover through the s\u00e9curit\u00e9 sociale des ind\u00e9pendants, the social security fund for the self-employed, and pension accrual follow automatically from contribution payments, which is why months of undeclared or under-declared activity damage both the residence file and the social record at once.<\/p>\n Three practical traps deserve emphasis because they convert a good business into a refused renewal. First, regulated activities, including building trades, food businesses, health and care professions, transport and many advisory roles, require diplomas, insurance or prior authorisation, and exercising them without the licence breaches the statute’s condition of acting in compliance with legislation in force. Second, the business bank account, professional insurance and numbered invoices with mandatory particulars are checked as evidence of real, lawful trading, and cash work that never appears on declarations destroys viability arguments later. Third, mixing salaried work into the picture without the right status creates its own problem: the entrepreneur card authorises self-employment, and taking a salaried job normally needs a separate authorisation, a point developed in our companion guide for British employees facing work-permit refusals at British Employee in France After Brexit: Work Permit and Salarie Card Refused<\/a>. British newcomers with rental income alongside freelancing should likewise read our first-tax-return guide at British Newcomer in France After Brexit: Your First French Tax Return<\/a>, because turnover, wages and rents are declared in different boxes and the prefecture reads the tax notice as the summary of the whole year.<\/p>\n Refusals almost always turn on the same two words, viable and sufficient, and the courts give them concrete content. In a leading Lyon appeal, CAA Lyon, 7th chamber, 17 October 2024, No 23LY02014<\/a>, a Russian handyman trading as an auto-entrepreneur challenged the prefect’s refusal to renew his entrepreneur card with an order to leave attached. The court recalled the governing principle in terms British applicants should memorise: “D\u00e8s lors que l’\u00e9tranger est lui-m\u00eame le cr\u00e9ateur de l’activit\u00e9, il lui appartient de pr\u00e9senter \u00e0 l’appui de sa demande les justificatifs permettant d’\u00e9valuer la viabilit\u00e9 \u00e9conomique de son activit\u00e9 ou entreprise, que celle-ci soit encore au stade de projet ou d\u00e9j\u00e0 cr\u00e9\u00e9e.” The burden lies on the creator, at project stage or once trading, to supply the documents from which viability can be judged. The applicant’s 2022 gross turnover of 20 918 euros looked respectable, but he proved contributions of only 2 738 euros and produced nothing on professional expenses, half the turnover had been invoiced in the final quarter including a single invoice dated after the contested decision, and the court concluded that “Rien au dossier ne permet d’\u00e9tablir que les revenus que M. B… tire de son activit\u00e9 lui auraient assur\u00e9, \u00e0 la date de la d\u00e9cision contest\u00e9e, des moyens suffisants d’existence.” Turnover alone therefore proves nothing: charges, expenses and the timing of income are subtracted or weighed before the prefecture answers whether the means are sufficient, and a file that hides expenses invites the inference that there is nothing left to live on.<\/p>\n A Douai appeal sharpens the lesson for thin or informal files. In CAA Douai, 2nd chamber, 20DA01436<\/a>, a Moroccan former student sought an entrepreneur card for a road-transport business after declaring barely 5 000 euros of turnover in 2019 and 4 442 euros in one quarter of 2020. The regional business authority had given an unfavourable opinion on viability, the subcontracting certificates he produced were unsupported by matching turnover declarations, and parallel earnings from ride-hailing and meal delivery could not rescue the transport business because they were never declared as its turnover. The court held that “Il suit de l\u00e0 que le pr\u00e9fet du Nord a pu l\u00e9galement refuser de d\u00e9livrer \u00e0 M. B… une carte de s\u00e9jour ” entrepreneur\/profession lib\u00e9rale “.” Three warnings follow for British readers. Unfavourable viability opinions are difficult to overcome without hard numbers. Certificates, letters of intent and promises of work count for nothing unless the corresponding turnover is declared. And income earned outside the declared activity, however real, does not make the declared activity viable. A British consultant who invoices through a British limited company while declaring a French auto-entreprise with token turnover commits exactly the Douai error in reverse.<\/p>\n The same decision answers a frequent follow-up question about exceptional admission to residence, the discretionary procedure that sometimes regularises people already in France. The court states plainly that an entrepreneur\/profession lib\u00e9rale card cannot be issued through exceptional admission to residence, because the exceptional-admission provision does not cover that card, and adds that the prefect need not examine a basis the applicant never raised. A British visitor who overstays visa-free presence and then asks for an entrepreneur card as an exceptional favour is therefore refused twice over: no long-stay visa under article L412-1, and no exceptional admission for this card. The decision also confirms a procedural point worth keeping: unfavourable individual decisions must state their legal and factual grounds, since unfavourable individual decisions must state the legal and factual grounds on which they rest, so a refusal that cites the wrong text, contradicts its own figures or ignores decisive evidence can be attacked for defective reasoning even where the underlying business is weak. Finally, the Lyon court usefully corrects a fiscal confusion that harms many files: the prefecture may not, as a matter of principle, reduce the income taken into account to turnover minus the 71, 50 and 34 per cent micro tax allowances, but must assess real charges and expenses, which cuts both ways and rewards applicants who document every cost.<\/p>\n A refusal of the entrepreneur card rarely arrives alone. Article L611-1 of the immigration code lists the cases in which the administration may order a person to leave France<\/a>, and its third case covers exactly this situation: “L’\u00e9tranger s’est vu refuser la d\u00e9livrance d’un titre de s\u00e9jour, le renouvellement du titre de s\u00e9jour, du document provisoire d\u00e9livr\u00e9 \u00e0 l’occasion d’une demande de titre de s\u00e9jour ou de l’autorisation provisoire de s\u00e9jour qui lui avait \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9livr\u00e9 ou s’est vu retirer un de ces documents”. Both appeal decisions studied above followed that pattern, pairing the refusal with a thirty-day order to leave and a designated country of return. Article L613-1 adds that<\/a> “La d\u00e9cision portant obligation de quitter le territoire fran\u00e7ais est motiv\u00e9e”, so the order must be reasoned, taking account of length of presence, nature and age of ties with France and humanitarian considerations, although where it follows a residence refusal it need not carry reasoning wholly separate from the refusal itself. For a British freelancer with a partner, children in French schools or a multi-year lease, those personal ties must be put in the file before the decision, because the court later judges the administration on the evidence it had at the time, and material produced for the first time produced for the first time before the judge carries less weight.<\/p>\n The remedy is an action before the administrative court, in French the tribunal administratif. Article L614-1 provides that<\/a> “La d\u00e9cision portant obligation de quitter le territoire fran\u00e7ais ainsi que la d\u00e9cision relative au s\u00e9jour, la d\u00e9cision relative au d\u00e9lai de d\u00e9part volontaire et l’interdiction de retour sur le territoire fran\u00e7ais qui l’accompagnent, le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant, peuvent \u00eatre contest\u00e9es devant le tribunal administratif selon la proc\u00e9dure pr\u00e9vue \u00e0 l’article L. 911-1.” In practice the application asks the court to annul the refusal and, by consequence, the departure order, and to order the prefect to issue the card, as both the Lyon and Douai applicants did, with the Lyon applicant seeking an injunction within one month and costs. Time limits are short and depend on the type of order, so the decision must be read the day it arrives: the departure period, the court with jurisdiction and the filing deadline all appear on the notification, and missing the deadline makes the order enforceable with possible forced removal and a re-entry ban. Alongside the court action, a gracious appeal to the prefect, called a recours gracieux, and a hierarchical appeal to the minister, called a recours hi\u00e9rarchique, can be filed to invite reconsideration, but they do not automatically suspend removal, so they complement rather than replace the court filing. Applicants who pursue only polite letters while the clock runs out discover that courtesy is not a remedy.<\/p>\n The file that wins on appeal looks different from the file that lost at the prefecture. Viability is proved with forward-looking and backward-looking evidence together: a dated business plan with market analysis and fee levels, signed client contracts or framework agreements, a twelve-month order book, supplier quotes, professional insurance certificates, the RNE or URSSAF registration, bank statements showing cash actually received, and accounts separating turnover, contributions, expenses and drawings. Means are proved net of everything: turnover minus contributions minus professional spending, supported by receipts, with household resources and the partner’s income documented where relevant. Where the prefecture relied on an unfavourable viability opinion, the appeal answers it line by line with figures rather than adjectives, commissions an accountant’s attestation where the stakes justify it, and explains any anomaly such as the Lyon applicant’s fourth-quarter spike before the judge asks. Defective reasoning is pleaded precisely: wrong legal basis, figures that contradict the stated conclusion, decisive evidence ignored, or personal and family ties never examined under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the right to respect for private and family life that the Douai court weighed before rejecting it on the facts. Finally, keep trading lawfully while the case runs, keep declaring every euro, keep the visa and receipts current, and take advice early, because an applicant who stops invoicing during the appeal confirms the prefecture’s prediction that the business was never viable.<\/p>\n A British freelancer can still build a working life in France after Brexit, but the route is narrower than the pre-2021 memory suggests and it rewards preparation over improvisation. The visa comes first and cannot be manufactured retrospectively, the entrepreneur card demands a viable activity matched to real qualifications with sufficient net means, the auto-entrepreneur brings simplicity at the price of turnover-based charges with no deduction for costs, and the prefecture judges all of it on documents rather than promises. The two appeal decisions in this guide draw the boundary clearly: creators carry the burden of proving viability with complete papers, subcontracting claims need matching declarations, outside earnings do not rescue the declared activity, and exceptional admission will not substitute for the proper visa and card. Readers who recognise their own file in the Lyon story of undocumented expenses or the Douai story of token turnover should repair the weak point before reapplying or appealing: register the correct activity, declare the full turnover, keep every expense receipt, insure and invoice properly, learn enough French to satisfy the integration requirements for the multi-year card, and file the administrative court action within its deadline with an injunction request rather than relying on letters alone. Done properly, the same business that looked fragile on twelve unexplained months becomes, on twenty-four documented ones, exactly what article L421-5 describes: non-salaried, viable and sufficient.<\/p>\n Telephone consultation: 80 EUR TTC with a lawyer of the firm, within 48 hours. First case review: 80 EUR TTC. Call +33 6 46 60 58 22<\/a> or write via our contact page<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" British and self-employed in France after Brexit? Entrepreneur card, auto-entrepreneur costs and how to challenge a prefecture refusal or OQTF.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":251031309,"featured_media":4189,"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-2129821","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-british-desk","category-decryptage"],"yoast_head":"\nB. Should a British newcomer register as auto-entrepreneur, and what will it really cost<\/h3>\n
II. What can a British freelancer do when the prefecture refuses the card or serves an OQTF<\/h2>\n
A. Why does the prefecture refuse entrepreneur cards: viability, means and proof<\/h3>\n
B. How do you challenge a refusal and an OQTF, and within what deadline<\/h3>\n
Conclusion<\/h2>\n
Need a quick opinion on your case<\/h2>\n