Your French company is growing, the initial capital is running thin, and you live in London, New York, Dubai or Singapore. The bank asks for stronger equity before extending an overdraft, a key hire wants shares, or a new investor is ready to wire funds on condition that the capital table is clean. You need to put more money into your French SAS (soci\u00e9t\u00e9 par actions simplifi\u00e9e, the flexible joint-stock company most foreign founders choose) or SARL (soci\u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e0 responsabilit\u00e9 limit\u00e9e, the limited liability company with parts sociales instead of shares) while you are thousands of kilometres away. This operation is called an augmentation de capital, a capital increase, and it follows a strict choreography: vote it correctly, protect or waive preferential rights, price the new securities, prove that the money really arrived, have contributions in kind independently checked, and register the result so that the Kbis (the official company identity certificate issued by the greffe, the registry of the commercial court) shows the new figure. Each step can be done from abroad with powers of attorney, video participation where the articles allow it, and a French bank, notary or fund depositary acting as the recipient of the cash. But each shortcut carries a sanction, and French courts annul increases voted or paid in breach of the rules. This guide walks you through the full path, from the extraordinary general meeting to the filing at the RCS (Registre du commerce et des soci\u00e9t\u00e9s, the French companies register) and the BODACC (Bulletin officiel des annonces civiles et commerciales, the official gazette where company notices are published), so that money wired from abroad becomes solid, unchallengeable capital.<\/p>\n
The capital increase is born in a vote, not in a wire transfer. Money sent to the company account before any decision is only a shareholder loan or a current-account advance, with none of the permanence of capital. The decision belongs to the shareholders, and the majority shareholder living abroad must organise it with the same care as if everyone sat around the same Paris table, because the minority, the auditor and even a future buyer will read these minutes.<\/p>\n
French company law gives the power to decide a capital increase to the extraordinary general meeting, the assembl\u00e9e g\u00e9n\u00e9rale extraordinaire, usually shortened to EGM. The rule is stated bluntly in the Commercial Code: “L’assembl\u00e9e g\u00e9n\u00e9rale extraordinaire est seule comp\u00e9tente pour d\u00e9cider, sur le rapport du conseil d’administration ou du directoire, une augmentation de capital imm\u00e9diate ou \u00e0 terme.”<\/a> In an SAS, the articles of association allocate powers freely, so the decision may belong to the collectivity of shareholders voting in the forms the articles provide, including videoconference, written consultation or electronic vote, but the logic is identical: a collective shareholder decision, taken on the basis of a management report, fixes the principle, the maximum amount, the type of securities and the timetable. The same article adds that the meeting may delegate implementation to the board or the management within five years, which is precisely the tool a founder living abroad needs: one EGM votes the envelope and delegates, and the president executes the tranches as the foreign funds arrive, with a supplementary report each time the delegation is used. When the board uses such a delegation, “le conseil d’administration, ou le directoire, \u00e9tablit, au moment o\u00f9 il est fait usage de l’autorisation, un rapport compl\u00e9mentaire d\u00e9crivant les conditions d\u00e9finitives de l’op\u00e9ration \u00e9tablies conform\u00e9ment \u00e0 l’autorisation donn\u00e9e par l’assembl\u00e9e.”<\/a> Keep that second report: it is the document a bank or a buyer asks for two years later to prove the increase was executed inside the delegated envelope.<\/p>\n The most sensitive point of the vote is the DPS, the droit pr\u00e9f\u00e9rentiel de souscription, or preferential subscription right. Every existing shareholder holds, in proportion to the shares already owned, a priority right to subscribe to new cash shares, so that a founder who owns 60 percent cannot be diluted to 20 percent overnight by an increase subscribed by a newcomer alone. The Code states the principle in one sentence: “Les actions comportent un droit pr\u00e9f\u00e9rentiel de souscription aux augmentations de capital.”<\/a> Shareholders may individually waive their rights, and the meeting may vote to suppress the right for all or part of the increase, but that suppression follows a fenced path: a management report, a special report of the statutory auditor where one exists, and the qualified majority the text requires. The provision reads: Article L. 225-135 of the Commercial Code then provides that the meeting “peut supprimer le droit pr\u00e9f\u00e9rentiel de souscription pour la totalit\u00e9 de l’augmentation de capital ou pour une ou plusieurs tranches de cette augmentation”<\/a>, under the conditions set by the following articles, ruling on the basis of a management report. In practice, the foreign founder who wants to bring in an outside investor votes the suppression for the tranche reserved to that investor, while the founder who injects his own money lets the rights play and subscribes proportionally. Never treat the waiver as a formality: shareholders individually renounce in writing, with the subscription period, the number of shares and the price stated, and the company keeps the waivers with the minutes. The Cour de cassation, the French supreme court for civil and commercial matters, shows how seriously judges take these rights. In a dispute inside the Int\u00e9grale group, where a shareholder complained he had been irregularly deprived of his preferential right during a capital operation combined with a reduction to zero, the commercial chamber recalled that suspending the resolutions that carried out the increase suspended the whole tied operation, holding that “la suspension des quatri\u00e8me, cinqui\u00e8me et sixi\u00e8me r\u00e9solutions, qui r\u00e9alisaient l’augmentation du capital et en tiraient les cons\u00e9quences statutaires, avait n\u00e9cessairement pour cons\u00e9quence de suspendre la r\u00e9duction du capital \u00e0 z\u00e9ro” (Cass. com., 4 Jan. 2023, No. 21-10.609<\/a>). The same judgment confirmed the deprived shareholder’s standing to sue for nullity of the downstream operation, ending with the words: “CASSE ET ANNULE, mais seulement en ce qu’il d\u00e9clare irrecevable l’action de [E] [N] en nullit\u00e9 de l’apport partiel d’actifs de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 Int\u00e9grale \u00e0 la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 Int\u00e9grale pr\u00e9pa”<\/a>. The lesson for a founder abroad is direct: organise the DPS question explicitly in the EGM, record waivers individually, and expect any shareholder squeezed out silently to obtain suspension and then nullity before the commercial court.<\/p>\n Two practical warnings complete the picture for distant shareholders. First, an increase that fails to attract all the planned subscriptions does not automatically collapse: the law lets the meeting limit the increase to the subscriptions received, but never below a floor. The text provides: “En aucun cas, le montant de l’augmentation de capital ne peut \u00eatre inf\u00e9rieur aux trois quarts de l’augmentation d\u00e9cid\u00e9e”<\/a>, unless the meeting resolves otherwise within the options the article lists, including discretionary reallocation of unsubscribed shares or a public offer where expressly authorised. Draft the EGM resolution to state in advance what happens if subscriptions reach only 80 percent: reduction to subscriptions received, reallocation to named persons, or cancellation. Second, if you chose an SARL rather than an SAS when setting up the French vehicle, and you still hesitate about the right structure, read our guide on how to choose between an SAS, a SARL, a branch and a subsidiary in France<\/a>, because the SARL has its own cash-liberation rule: “Ces parts sont obligatoirement lib\u00e9r\u00e9es, lors de la souscription, d’un quart au moins de leur valeur nominale.”<\/a> The balance must then be released within five years from the day the increase becomes final. A founder who wires only 10 percent of the subscribed SARL increase has not completed the operation, and the company cannot validly withdraw the deposited funds until the depositary certificate confirms the legal minimum.<\/p>\n Once the EGM has spoken, the second decision is the price. In a cash increase with preferential rights maintained, the price matters less because every shareholder can follow proportionally, but as soon as rights are suppressed for a newcomer, the issue price decides how much of the company the founders surrender per euro invested. For listed-style public offers without preferential rights, the Code requires the EGM to set the price or the price-setting method on the basis of a management report and a special auditor report, a safeguard that informs the practice for private SAS operations even when the articles leave pricing to the shareholders. The provision opens with: “L’\u00e9mission de titres de capital sans droit pr\u00e9f\u00e9rentiel de souscription par une offre au public est soumise aux conditions suivantes”<\/a>, followed by the report requirements. Transpose the spirit to your private increase: commission an independent valuation or at least a reasoned management note, disclose the method, multiple, discount or nominal-plus-premium construction, and attach the auditor’s observations where the company has one. The share premium, the prime d’\u00e9mission, the surplus paid above nominal value, belongs to the company and protects existing shareholders against dilution at nominal value; it appears in equity and can later be incorporated into capital or distributed under conditions. Document why the price is fair on the day of the vote, because a minority shareholder who discovers a year later that new shares were issued at a symbolic price while the company held valuable contracts will attack the operation as a disguised gift or an abuse of majority.<\/p>\n Contributions in kind deserve even stricter paperwork. Instead of wiring cash, the foreign parent may contribute shares of another company, a business, software, a patent or equipment to the French subsidiary. French law then requires an independent valuation by a commissaire aux apports, a contributions auditor, appointed unanimously by the founders or shareholders or, failing unanimity, by the court at the request of a founder, a shareholder or the manager. For companies limited by shares the rule states: “un ou plusieurs commissaires aux apports sont d\u00e9sign\u00e9s \u00e0 l’unanimit\u00e9 des fondateurs ou, \u00e0 d\u00e9faut, par d\u00e9cision de justice, \u00e0 la demande des fondateurs ou de l’un d’entre eux.”<\/a> For the SARL the parallel provision reads: “Le commissaire aux apports est d\u00e9sign\u00e9 \u00e0 l’unanimit\u00e9 des associ\u00e9s ou, \u00e0 d\u00e9faut, par une d\u00e9cision de justice \u00e0 la demande d’un associ\u00e9 ou du g\u00e9rant.”<\/a> The auditor values each contribution under his own responsibility, states whether the value is not overestimated, and his report is filed and made available before the vote. If the shareholders retain a value higher than the auditor’s proposal, or skip the auditor where one was mandatory, the managers and the subscribers face five years of joint liability toward third parties for the assigned value. The Cour de cassation added a sharp independence requirement in May 2026: where the appointed contributions auditor had previously performed accounting work for the very company whose shares were contributed, the deliberations taken on the basis of his report are void. The court held: “Il r\u00e9sulte de la combinaison des articles L. 225-149-3, dans sa r\u00e9daction alors applicable, L. 225-147, L. 227-1 et L. 822-11-3, devenu L. 821-31, du code de commerce que les fonctions de commissaire aux apports sont, \u00e0 peine de nullit\u00e9 des d\u00e9lib\u00e9rations prises au vu de son rapport, incompatibles avec toute activit\u00e9 ou tout acte de nature \u00e0 porter atteinte \u00e0 son ind\u00e9pendance”<\/a>, adding: “Il en est ainsi lorsque le commissaire aux apports a, avant sa d\u00e9signation, accompli, pour le compte de la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 dont les titres sont apport\u00e9s, une mission d’expertise-comptable de cette soci\u00e9t\u00e9.”<\/a> And the nullity spreads: “Cette nullit\u00e9 s’\u00e9tend \u00e0 la lettre de mission elle-m\u00eame.”<\/a> A foreign group must therefore never ask its usual French accountant to rubber-stamp the value of the shares it contributes; it petitions the president of the commercial court for an independent appointee, discloses any prior engagement, and lets the auditor work from audited accounts and a real valuation method. From abroad, the founder’s role is to send complete, sincere information, certified translations of foreign accounts where needed, and to accept a valuation that may disappoint: an inflated contribution collapses at the first dispute, while a conservative, well-documented one survives audits, divorces between partners and tax reviews.<\/p>\n Voting is only half the operation. French law distinguishes subscription, the commitment to take new shares, from liberation, the actual payment, and then requires proof by an independent depositary before a single euro of the increase can be used. The founder living abroad organises this chain like a funds flow: subscription forms signed with powers of attorney, international transfer with a clear reference, depositary certificate, auditor verification where required, EGM or board acknowledgment that the increase is final, updated articles, and filing. Each link has its form, and the greffe checks them.<\/p>\nB. How to price the new shares and document contributions without creating tomorrow’s dispute<\/h3>\n
II. Pay, certify and register the new capital from abroad<\/h2>\n
A. How to wire the funds, obtain the depositary certificate and release the money<\/h3>\n