Swiss company owning real estate in France: corporate tax, the full tax return and the disputed obligations

A ministerial answer challenged before the Conseil d'État, and what remains of it

On 5 November 2024 a member of the National Assembly asked the minister what Swiss sociétés anonymes that own real estate in France, without a permanent establishment there, have to do. The answer, published in the Journal officiel of 3 February 2026 (written question no. 1696), states that such companies must register with the one-stop shop, keep commercial accounts under the general rules, record their depreciation, and file an electronic return with the full tax package (Assemblée nationale, in French).

A Swiss société anonyme asked the Conseil d'État to annul those statements. In its decision of 16 July 2026 the court first states that ministerial answers are not acts open to challenge, unless they contain an interpretation of tax law that can be relied on against the authority under Article L. 80 A of the Tax Procedure Code (LPF). It then examines the two sets of obligations.

• Tax, return, depreciation (point 5). In stating that a Swiss société anonyme, which is equivalent to a French société anonyme and liable to corporate tax on the income from its French real estate, must comply with the tax obligations attached to that liability, in particular record the depreciation it deducts and file electronically a return and its annexed schedules, the answer does not misread the meaning or scope of the legislative provisions it explains.
• Commercial register and commercial bookkeeping (point 6). In stating that the company must register with the commercial and companies register and keep accounts under the general conditions of the Commercial Code, when obligations of such scope do not follow from the provisions cited, the answer contains an interpretation of the law that is unfavourable to the taxpayers concerned.
• Outcome (point 7). The statements challenged contain no interpretation of tax law that can be relied on against the authority under Article L. 80 A: the application is inadmissible and is dismissed.

The decision therefore gives two things. It does not recognise a right for Swiss companies to avoid registration or commercial bookkeeping: it notes that the texts cited do not impose them. Nor does it protect those companies against an assessment based on those obligations, since the answer cannot be relied on against the authority. The decision is mentioned in the Lebon tables.

Why a Swiss company is liable to corporate tax on its French property

The reasoning has four steps, which the Conseil d'État recalls or applies in its decisions of 2000, 2022 and 2026.

• Equivalence. Foreign companies are liable to corporate tax, where they carry out transactions whose profits are taxable in France under Article 209 of the CGI, if, having regard to all their characteristics and the law governing their formation and operation, they are equivalent to the types of French company listed in Article 206 (Conseil d'État, 16 July 2026, point 2). The civil or commercial nature of the purpose is irrelevant for a company limited by shares (Conseil d'État, 22 July 2022, point 3).
• Allocation to France. Under Article 6(1) of the France-Switzerland treaty, income from real property is taxable in the State where the property is situated. Paragraph 4 extends that rule to the income from the real property of an enterprise. Article 209 of the CGI covers profits whose taxation is allocated to France by a treaty.
• No permanent establishment. Under the treaty, a permanent establishment is the fixed place of business whose mere existence makes taxable in France the profits the enterprise makes there (Article 7). It cannot be found where a Swiss enterprise earns in France only income from real property taxable solely because of where the property is situated (Conseil d'État, section, 20 October 2000, no. 182165). The tax authority's doctrine states the same solution for a Swiss société anonyme (BOI-INT-CVB-CHE-10-20-10, § 20, in French).
• The rate. The standard corporate tax rate is 25%. A 15% rate applies, up to €42,500 of profit per twelve-month period, to taxpayers whose turnover does not exceed €10 million and whose fully paid-up capital is held continuously, as to at least 75%, by individuals or by a company meeting the same conditions, on the conditions of Article 219, I, b of the CGI (CGI, art. 219, I).

The equivalence test applies to any company governed by foreign law: the court identifies the type of French company it resembles, then applies the corresponding regime (Conseil d'État, 22 July 2022, point 2). A Swiss limited liability company, for example, is assessed on its own characteristics.

What the company must do in France, and what remains disputed

Withholding tax on the profit: the authority's position

The ministerial answer also examines withholding tax. It recalls that Article 115 quinquies of the CGI deems profits made in France by foreign companies to be distributed, which opens the withholding tax of Article 119 bis, 2, without a permanent establishment being necessary. It adds that, under Article 11 of the France-Switzerland treaty, a mechanism of that type is prohibited and France cannot apply any withholding tax to the income concerned.

That is the authority's position, published with the answer; the Conseil d'État did not examine it. It concerns withholding tax on profit made in France, not the taxation of dividends that the company later pays to its shareholder, which Article 11 of the treaty governs (text of the treaty, in French).

The 3% tax: a separate matter for the same company

A company that owns French real estate directly or through an interposed entity owes an annual tax of 3% of its market value (CGI, art. 990 D). Article 990 E exempts, in particular, entities with their seat in a State that has concluded an administrative assistance convention with France and that file each year, by 15 May at the latest, a return setting out the location, make-up and value of the property and the identity of shareholders holding more than 1%: all of them under point d of paragraph 3, those known to the company under point e, which provides for a pro rata calculation (CGI, art. 990 E, 3°, d and e). For corporate tax purposes Switzerland is among the States linked to France by an exchange-of-information clause (BOI-ANNX-000508, table at 1 January 2025, in French). Since 27 June 2026, an entity with no permanent establishment in France must also appoint, in that return, a person resident or established in France who is authorised to receive the authority's notifications concerning audit of the tax; failing that, the entity closest to the property in the chain of holdings is deemed authorised to receive them (CGI, art. 990 FA, in French).

Corporate tax and the 3% tax follow two separate logics: filing a tax return does not replace the 15 May return, and vice versa. Our page on the 3% tax covers the exemptions, the 2026 Court of Cassation decisions and the filing regime.

Three Conseil d'État decisions on the Swiss company and its property

All three decisions were read in full on the Conseil d'État website.

• Conseil d'État, 8th and 3rd chambers together, 16 July 2026, no. 514132, Décorasud SA (Lebon tables, application dismissed). A ministerial answer can be challenged only if it contains an interpretation of tax law that can be relied on under Article L. 80 A of the LPF. The answer of 3 February 2026 does not misread the texts on liability to corporate tax, the return and depreciation; the registration with the commercial register and commercial bookkeeping it requires do not follow from the texts cited, but that unfavourable interpretation cannot be relied on against the authority: application inadmissible (Légifrance, in French).
• Conseil d'État, 9th and 10th chambers together, 22 July 2022, no. 444942, Phoenix Union Co (Lebon tables, appeal dismissed). A Swiss company, a capital company whose shareholder is liable only up to his or her contributions, is equivalent to a French société anonyme and liable to corporate tax by reason of its form. By making two apartments in Cannes available free of charge to its sole shareholder it commits an abnormal act of management; the income is income from real property within Article 6 of the treaty, not income not specifically dealt with under its Article 23 (Légifrance, in French).
• Conseil d'État, section, 20 October 2000, no. 182165, New Building Promotion Ltd (published in the Lebon collection, annulment and discharge). A Swiss company that owns three office buildings in France, let unfurnished, has no permanent establishment there: Article 6 of the treaty is enough to make its income taxable, and the interest on a loan from a Swiss bank does not arise in France within Article 12, so that the levy of Article 125 A of the CGI could not apply (Légifrance, in French).

What to do: four checks

• Qualify the company. Identify the type of French company it resembles: a société anonyme, a limited liability company, a foundation or a Swiss simple partnership are not analysed in the same way.
• Regularise open years. File the missing returns and tax packages, quantifying the normal rent if the property is made available to the shareholder.
• Deal with the 3% tax. File the annual return due by 15 May or check another ground of exemption.
• Prepare the exit or sale. A sale of shares in a company whose assets consist mainly of French real estate bears 5% registration duty and, since 27 June 2026, is subject to Article 1865-1 of the Civil Code (authentic deed, lawyer-countersigned deed or, only where empowered, a chartered accountant's deed). If the sale is signed abroad, Article 726, III, A of the CGI also requires, within one month, an authentic deed received by a notary practising in France: see our page on the transfer of real estate company shares.

For a Swiss company that holds several properties or is controlled from France, the question of the place of effective management and of a permanent establishment arises as well: see permanent establishment and corporate tax and our page on the France-Switzerland tax treaty.