Your French SAS invoices its clients in Paris, then pays a monthly management fee to its parent company in London, New York or Dubai for strategy, finance, IT and brand support. From the foreign shareholder’s desk this looks like an ordinary group charge. From the French tax administration’s desk it looks like profit leaving France before corporate tax. When the auditor arrives, the first question is never about your business model. It is about proof: what service was really performed in France, at what price, and where is the file that shows it.<\/p>\n
This guide explains, in plain business English for a non-French reader, how to keep management fees deductible in a French subsidiary owned from abroad, what transfer pricing file to hold from day one, and how to challenge a reassessment without living in France. The Kbis is the official company identity certificate issued by the greffe, the commercial court registry. The BODACC, the official bulletin of civil and commercial announcements, publishes creations and moves. The URSSAF network collects social charges on salaries, while the Direction g\u00e9n\u00e9rale des finances publiques, the tax administration, collects corporate tax and audits transfer prices. The INPI one-stop portal registers the company, but it does not validate your intra-group prices. Only contemporaneous proof does.<\/p>\n
French law taxes profits made in France, allows deduction only for real and proportionate charges, brings indirectly transferred profits back into the French base, and treats unexplained credits as distributions. It also sets a 25 percent standard corporate rate, quarterly pre-payments and late interest, which frame the cash cost of any adjustment. This article cites the exact texts in force read on L\u00e9gifrance during this run and published court decisions. Figures are those of the texts cited. For the wider annual timetable that frames the tax return, see also our companion guide on your French company annual legal calendar and how to approve accounts from abroad<\/a>.<\/p>\n A French subsidiary owned from abroad is a separate French taxpayer. It files, pays and defends on its own, even when the parent approves the budget by email from another continent. Auditors start with intra-group flows because they move the margin across the border. The two sections below explain the base they protect and the deduction test your fees must pass.<\/p>\n The starting point is that \u201cIl est \u00e9tabli un imp\u00f4t sur l’ensemble des b\u00e9n\u00e9fices ou revenus r\u00e9alis\u00e9s par les soci\u00e9t\u00e9s et autres personnes morales d\u00e9sign\u00e9es \u00e0 l’article 206 .\u201d<\/a> The next article lists, among others, soci\u00e9t\u00e9s anonymes, soci\u00e9t\u00e9s en commandite par actions, soci\u00e9t\u00e9s \u00e0 responsabilit\u00e9 limit\u00e9e<\/a> carrying on profit-making operations, which covers the SAS, SA and SARL used by foreign groups. For the calculation, \u201cLe taux normal de l’imp\u00f4t est fix\u00e9 \u00e0 25 %.\u201d<\/a> That rate prices the risk: every euro of fee added back to profit costs 25 cents of corporate tax before interest and penalties, plus potential distribution consequences at shareholder level.<\/p>\n The base is territorial. The Code provides that taxable profits are determined under the rules it lists, \u201cen tenant compte uniquement des b\u00e9n\u00e9fices r\u00e9alis\u00e9s dans les entreprises exploit\u00e9es en France\u201d<\/a>, plus certain listed French-source items and profits attributed to France by a double-tax treaty. A SAS with French premises, French staff or French commercial activity is fully inside that base even if its sole shareholder lives in Dubai. Profits booked abroad that belong economically to the French operation can be pulled back on audit, which is why documentation between the French company and its foreign parent deserves attention from the first year.<\/p>\n Transfer pricing is the specific tool for that pull-back. The Code provides that for enterprises dependent on or controlling enterprises outside France, \u201cles b\u00e9n\u00e9fices indirectement transf\u00e9r\u00e9s \u00e0 ces derni\u00e8res, soit par voie de majoration ou de diminution des prix d’achat ou de vente, soit par tout autre moyen, sont incorpor\u00e9s aux r\u00e9sultats accus\u00e9s par les comptabilit\u00e9s.\u201d<\/a> The same article extends the rule to enterprises dependent on a group that also controls foreign enterprises, and it removes the dependence condition for transfers with enterprises in privileged or non-cooperative states. It adds that where the taxpayer fails to answer a request under Article L.13 B or fails to produce all or part of the documentation under Article L.13 AA and L.13 AB, the administration assesses the concerned bases from the elements it holds under the adversarial procedure of Articles L.57 to L.61, and that failing precise elements, taxable products are set by comparison with similar enterprises operated normally. It further provides that when the transfer pricing method departs from the documentation made available by the legal person, the gap between the result and the amount it would have reached if that documentation had been followed is deemed to be indirectly transferred profit. In plain terms: charge the French subsidiary a price that an independent company would pay, write down the method before the audit, then apply it consistently.<\/p>\n Three business consequences follow. First, the parent-subsidiary link itself triggers the rule. You do not need a tax-haven invoice to be questioned. Dependence alone is enough. Second, privileged-regime counterparties face a harsher track with no dependence condition, which matters if support services are billed from a low-tax hub. Third, missing paperwork changes the procedure against you. Without documentation, the administration prices from what it has and compares you to similar companies, and any departure from your own file counts as shifted profit. A one-page intercompany agreement signed after the audit starts does not cure three years without timesheets or deliverables.<\/p>\n Action list at incorporation: record where value is created, decide which entity does what, set a pricing method in writing, and store it where the French accountant can produce it within days. Treaties allocate taxing rights between states but do not bless an undocumented margin. The treaty between France and your state of residence sits next to the file, not instead of it.<\/p>\n Even outside transfer pricing comparables, French law tests every remuneration for reality and size. The Code states that net profit is set after deduction of all charges, but it conditions pay strictly: \u201cLes r\u00e9mun\u00e9rations ne sont admises en d\u00e9duction des r\u00e9sultats que dans la mesure o\u00f9 elles correspondent \u00e0 un travail effectif et ne sont pas excessives eu \u00e9gard \u00e0 l’importance du service rendu.\u201d<\/a> The rule covers direct and indirect pay, including allowances, benefits in kind and expense reimbursements. Management fees from a foreign parent are tested exactly on this ground: no effective work in France for the French subsidiary, or a price out of line with the service, means add-back to taxable profit.<\/p>\n Stricter proof applies when the payee sits in a privileged regime. The Code provides for certain interest, royalties, licence fees and service remuneration paid by a French debtor to persons in a foreign state with a privileged tax regime that they are deductible only if the debtor proves real operations and non-abnormal, non-exaggerated character, stating that \u201cne sont admis comme charges d\u00e9ductibles pour l’\u00e9tablissement de l’imp\u00f4t que si le d\u00e9biteur apporte la preuve que les d\u00e9penses correspondent \u00e0 des op\u00e9rations r\u00e9elles et qu’elles ne pr\u00e9sentent pas un caract\u00e8re anormal ou exag\u00e9r\u00e9.\u201d<\/a> Persons are treated as under a privileged regime where they are not taxable there or are subject to profit taxes more than 40 percent below French common law. If group support is centralised in a low-tax location, the French subsidiary carries that proof on every euro.<\/p>\n What proves effective work in practice is concrete and dated. A service agreement that lists tasks, allocates time, names the people who intervene, sets a price method and explains the benefit to the French subsidiary. Monthly reports that show what was done for the French company that month, not a group newsletter. Timesheets, tickets, code commits, campaign files, board packs prepared for the French entity, recruitment files for French hires, and travel records when the parent visits Paris. Invoices that mirror the agreement and the reports, with a price that can be tied to hours, to cost plus a stated margin, or to a benchmark you can show. Bank proof that the French company actually paid. Without that chain, the auditor treats the fee as a distribution of profit rather than a charge for a service.<\/p>\n Unexplained movements aggravate the bill because tax law recharacterises them. It provides that \u201cSont consid\u00e9r\u00e9s comme revenus distribu\u00e9s : 1\u00b0 Tous les b\u00e9n\u00e9fices ou produits qui ne sont pas mis en r\u00e9serve ou incorpor\u00e9s au capital ;\u201d<\/a> with measurement by balance-sheet comparison. Case law applies this to current accounts with force. The Court of Cassation holds that \u201cil r\u00e9sulte de l’article 109 du code g\u00e9n\u00e9ral des imp\u00f4ts que les sommes inscrites au cr\u00e9dit d’un compte courant d’associ\u00e9 ont, sauf preuve contraire apport\u00e9e par l’associ\u00e9 titulaire du compte, le caract\u00e8re de revenus imposables dans la cat\u00e9gorie des revenus de capitaux mobiliers.\u201d<\/a> In that case, credit balances of 127,013.29 euros and 126,866.71 euros entered in 2008 were treated as distributed income after verification of a French SARL. The lesson for management fees is parallel: a fee credited but never documented as a service, left on a compte courant d’associ\u00e9, the shareholder current account, or offset without payment, can be taxed as a distribution on top of the corporate add-back. Pay real fees through the bank, book them as charges with contracts behind them, and keep the current account for true advances with written terms.<\/p>\n Timing discipline protects dividend planning around fees. The Court of Cassation states that \u201cLes b\u00e9n\u00e9fices r\u00e9alis\u00e9s par une soci\u00e9t\u00e9 ne participent de la nature des fruits que lors de leur attribution sous forme de dividendes, lesquels n’ont pas d’existence juridique avant l’approbation des comptes de l’exercice par l’assembl\u00e9e g\u00e9n\u00e9rale\u201d<\/a>, with the meeting recording distributable sums and each share. Do not dress an informal drawing as a fee or an advance dividend. Approve accounts, record distributable amounts, then distribute. That sequence fixes the year and the nature of each flow.<\/p>\n Losses interact with fee adjustments. The Code allows a deficit to be carried forward as a charge of the next year within \u201cla limite d’un montant de 1 000 000 \u20ac major\u00e9 de 50 % du montant correspondant au b\u00e9n\u00e9fice imposable dudit exercice exc\u00e9dant ce premier montant.\u201d<\/a> If profit is insufficient, the excess moves forward on the same terms. A start-up that deducts heavy first-year support fees and makes a loss can shelter later profit within that cap, but only if the fees survive the tests above. A fee added back wipes out the loss and creates taxable profit. Keep the loss table year by year, reconciled to filed returns, as shown in strict group-loss litigation such as Paris Court of Appeal decision of 24 March 2026 No 24\/02171 at the official Judilibre record of appeal decision 24\/02171<\/a>, where deficit allocation was checked line by line.<\/p>\n Deductible on paper is not enough. The fee must be payable through the French system, recorded in commercial accounts that support the return, and defensible in the adversarial procedure that starts with a reasoned proposal. A foreign director can run all three from abroad with mandates and calendars.<\/p>\n Corporate tax is pre-paid in instalments from the last closed year, and the Code states that \u201cLes paiements doivent \u00eatre effectu\u00e9s au plus tard les 15 mars, 15 juin, 15 septembre et 15 d\u00e9cembre de chaque ann\u00e9e.\u201d<\/a> New companies are exempt from instalments for their first year of activity or first tax period, and small bodies below 84,000 euros turnover in the last closed year are also exempt. Large companies face top-up minima on the last instalment. For most SMEs owned from abroad, the rhythm is four dates funded from a French or SEPA-compatible business account linked to the SIREN number and paid online through the professional tax account. A fee adjustment that increases last-year profit increases next-year instalments, so price the cash effect of losing on fees, not only the back tax.<\/p>\n Commercial accounts feed the defence. The law requires that \u201cToute personne physique ou morale ayant la qualit\u00e9 de commer\u00e7ant doit proc\u00e9der \u00e0 l’enregistrement comptable des mouvements affectant le patrimoine de son entreprise.\u201d<\/a> with chronological entry, a stock-take at least every twelve months, and annual accounts with balance sheet, profit-and-loss account and notes forming an inseparable whole. In practice, the French accountant books each fee invoice as a charge with the agreement number, the return deducts the same amount, the bank statement shows payment, and the minutes approve the accounts that contain them. Any gap between those four breaks the chain. Reconcile them before filing, not after the auditor asks.<\/p>\n Late payment adds interest even without a penalty. The Code provides that \u201cToute cr\u00e9ance de nature fiscale, dont l’\u00e9tablissement ou le recouvrement incombe aux administrations fiscales, qui n’a pas \u00e9t\u00e9 acquitt\u00e9e dans le d\u00e9lai l\u00e9gal donne lieu au versement d’un int\u00e9r\u00eat de retard.\u201d<\/a> with penalties where provided, and it spares interest in two narrow cases, including express disclosure of the uncertain item on the return with reasons or a genuine difficulty of interpretation of a new provision with a prior ruling request left unanswered. For management fees with a novel benchmark, disclose the method expressly in an annex rather than staying silent. Disclosure does not win substance, but it can save interest if the conditions are met. A separate 5 percent increase applies to late payment of sums due to tax accountants under the conditions of the article on late payment, found at the official text on the 5 percent late-payment increase<\/a>, which also covers inaccurate instalments in defined cases.<\/p>\n Do not mix corporate tax with other tracks. The CFE local premises tax is due yearly from the second year even with little profit on its own return and deadlines. VAT, payroll withholding and URSSAF contributions follow separate audits and appeals. A transfer pricing victory does not cancel a CFE or URSSAF assessment. Keep one page per year showing last closed profit, instalment base with four receipts, return filing, fee totals with agreement references, and the name of the person with payment rights. Share it quarterly with the foreign parent.<\/p>\n A fee reassessment starts with a letter the foreign director must treat as the most important mail of the year. The Book of Tax Procedures provides that \u201cL’administration adresse au contribuable une proposition de rectification qui doit \u00eatre motiv\u00e9e de mani\u00e8re \u00e0 lui permettre de formuler ses observations ou de faire conna\u00eetre son acceptation.\u201d<\/a> The same article adds that on request received before expiry of the period in Article L.11, that period is extended by thirty days, and that rejection of observations must also be reasoned. Diarise the deadline on receipt, request the thirty-day extension in writing before expiry when evidence sits in another country, and reply point by point with documents.<\/p>\n Mirror the auditor’s method in your reply. If the proposal invokes Article 57, show independence of price: comparable uncontrolled transactions, cost-plus build with stated margin, or another method from your file applied consistently, with an explanation of why it fits the service. The Conseil d’Etat tracks this logic on distributions after audit, as in its 22 March 2021 decision No 436426 on income taxed under Article 109 following correction of corporate result, available at the official Conseil d’Etat record of decision No 436426<\/a>, where examination of personal tax position followed corporate rectification. The teaching point for fees is the same chain reaction: a corporate add-back can become a deemed distribution to the foreign shareholder, so defend both levels together with the accounting chain and the consideration.<\/p>\n If the auditor taxes a credit as a distribution, rebut the Article 109 presumption with the full ledger, bank moves, loan terms and transfer deeds, as required by the 9 September 2020 decision No 19-16.047. If the auditor uses comparison with similar enterprises, test the proposal against the reasoning duties for valuation, including dates, addresses, activities and prices or averages where required. If the auditor disputes the loss that the fees created, show the year-by-year cap computation. The decisions consulted in this run do not state a single general limitation period or starting point for all fee reassessments, so do not assume one from commentary. Read the period and basis stated in your own proposal and argue time-bar only from the text cited there.<\/p>\nI. Why management fees paid abroad are audited first: French base and deduction test<\/h2>\n
A. Which profit France taxes when the parent lives abroad: territorial base and shifted profits<\/h3>\n
B. When a foreign-parent invoice stays deductible: real work and proportionate price<\/h3>\n
II. How to pay for support and defend it from abroad: cash, accounts and reassessment<\/h2>\n
A. How to fund and record fees without living in France: bank, accounts and late cost<\/h3>\n
B. How to challenge a fee reassessment from abroad: reasoned proposal, proof and criminal edge<\/h3>\n