France–Belgium — Tax Treaty

1Two conventions in force, a third signed and waiting — and a protocol narrower than its reputation

This relationship runs on two instruments at once, which few in this collection can say. The income convention of 10 March 1964 governs rents, gains and the machinery around them, consolidated with the multilateral instrument. The succession convention of 20 January 1959 governs what happens at death. Only the Monaco relationship of 1950 and the United Kingdom relationship of 1963 also carry a death treaty here.

Article 3 of the 1964 text is worth reading for its wording as much as its rule. Income from property "is taxable ONLY in the contracting state where the property is situated" — exclusive, where most conventions of that era say merely that such income may be taxed there and leave the other state free to tax it too. Paragraph 4 extends the same rule to "profits resulting from the alienation of immovable property", so the rent and the sale profit are answered together. Article 2 reaches income taxes alone, so the 1964 convention has no wealth-tax article at all — there is no wealth article anywhere in the convention.

The final protocol says less than it is asked to carry

The 1964 convention has a final protocol, signed the same day and stated in its own opening words to "form an integral part of the Convention". Read end to end at this edition, its point 2 is the one that matters to an owner, and it is narrower than its reputation. It provides that article 15 §1 does not prevent France from treating as immovable property, within the meaning of article 3, the shares held by members of companies whose SOLE OBJECT IS, in fact, either building or acquiring buildings or groups of buildings with a view to dividing them into parts to be allotted to their members in ownership or in enjoyment, or managing buildings so divided. That describes the French attribution company. It does not describe the ordinary société civile immobilière that simply holds a property. The same point then preserves Belgium's right to tax its own residents on income from those shares within articles 15 and 19-A.

Where the divergence lives

The administration reads point 2 as an example rather than a closed list, and treats the shares of ordinary property-rich companies as immovable too — property-rich companies; its commentary says so, and the Conseil d'État upheld that reading on 24 February 2020 (n° 436392), so France taxes a Belgian resident's gain on SCI shares under CGI article 244 bis A. Belgian courts have read the very same shares as movable property, which sends them to the residuary article of the 1964 text — taxable only in the state of residence. Both readings are held by serious institutions and they do not agree. THE GAP BETWEEN WHAT THE PROTOCOL SAYS AND WHAT IT IS READ TO MEAN IS WHERE THIS PAIR'S DIVERGENCE LIVES, and § 3 sets out what follows for an owner. It is dispute space rather than a structure.

A third convention has been signed and is not in force

France and Belgium signed a new income and fortune convention on 9 November 2021. It is not in force, and the standstill is documented rather than assumed: the French administration lists it among texts signed and awaiting ratification, and the signed text opens with a note saying so; ministerial answers of February 2025 and September 2025 record that France has not tabled the approval bill and that discussions continue with no timetable; a Senate question of May 2026 reports it as ratified by neither France nor any of the six Belgian assemblies whose approval is required. When it does take effect it will name the French wealth tax and the CSG and CRDS expressly, give France gains on property-rich shares outright and so end the divergence above at its root, assign property fortune to France, and add a clause on former residents. It reaches French taxes only from the year following the year it enters force. AND IT DOES NOT TERMINATE THE 1959 SUCCESSION CONVENTION, which survives it.

Sources considered: 1964 convention (official consolidation with the multilateral instrument) arts. 2, 3, 15, 19-A and final protocol points 1–7; 1959 succession convention; the convention signed 9 November 2021 (not in force) art. 29; BOI-INT-CVB-BEL-10-10 §130 and -20; CE, 24 February 2020, n° 436392 — decision text read; the ministerial answers of 4 February 2025 and 16 September 2025 and the Senate question of May 2026. Scope note: Belgian domestic law and Belgian case law are stated at orientation level only and never carry a conclusion here.

Reviewed as at 11 August 2026 · 1964 convention arts. 2, 3 + final protocol; 1959 succession convention; the 2021 text (signed, not in force); CE n° 436392 — texts read

2What you pay to buy a property in France, and what it costs you every year

Buying is priced by French law and takes no notice of where the buyer lives. On the Cannes median of €4.9M, the transfer duties at 5.81% come to €284,526 and the notaire's scaled fee to roughly €61,250 — about €345,776 before any survey, agency or financing cost. Those duties are the largest single line of the purchase, and they are the reason the deed structure is settled before signature rather than after — which on this pair matters more than most, because the deed decides how § 6 reads.

The wealth tax, with no treaty in the way

Above €1,300,000 of taxable French real-estate assets, CGI article 964 institutes the annual wealth tax; for a person not domiciled in France the base takes in property located in France and the fraction of any company's shares that stands for such property (article 965, 2°). The 1964 convention covers income taxes only — its own extension clause reaches later taxes of the same or an analogous KIND, which means taxes analogous to income taxes — so there is no wealth article to consult and the charge rests on French domestic law without treaty restriction. The convention signed in 2021 would name the French wealth tax expressly and assign property fortune to France: it will confirm the charge rather than shelter it. The value declared each year is the owner's own detailed estimate of real market value (CGI article 973 I), which is why a dated written valuation resting on comparable sales is worth holding.

Debt, and what it does to the base

Acquisition debt owed to a bank is deductible from the wealth base under CGI article 974, while financial assets sit outside that base altogether. Three limits apply. A loan repaying capital only at term is treated as if it were being repaid gradually, the deduction declining over the loan's life — by one twentieth a year where no term is fixed. Where taxable property exceeds €5M and the debt exceeds 60% of that value, the excess counts only for half. And debt owed to the owner's own company or family is admitted only on proof that the loan is genuine and normal.

The local charges, and the 3% tax

The annual local property tax (taxe foncière) follows the deed at communal rates; a surcharge can apply to furnished second homes in tension zones. Separately, CGI articles 990 D to 990 E charge 3% of market value each year on entities holding French property. An entity established in the EU is exempt on filing, which a Belgian company is — so this is a declaration to make rather than a cost to carry, and it is lost by a missed filing rather than by any change in the facts.

Our agency prepares a free valuation for owners at valuation.elenaagueeva.com. An agent contacts you within 48 hours to arrange a visit.

It rests on the same official records a French property valuer (expert immobilier) works from: the government's register of recorded sale prices, the cadastre, and the planning permits granted on the parcel. The agent then visits to appraise the view, the garden, and the quality of the construction and the finishes. The valuation report (avis de valeur) is produced within 48 hours of the visit.

The same figure carries your French filings. Wealth tax, the 3% company tax and gift duty are all declared at the property's market value. The law takes that value from your own detailed estimate (articles 761 and 973 of the tax code), and asks no particular valuer to produce it. A court-appointed expert (expert judiciaire) belongs to litigation, not to a declaration. If the administration challenges your figure, a dated, written valuation resting on comparable sales is what supports it.

The first valuation of a property is free for its owner or seller. A repeat valuation of the same property, or one commissioned by a family office, a bank or another adviser for a client, is a billable engagement — ask us for terms.

Sources considered: 1964 convention art. 2; the 2021 text (signed, not in force) arts. 2, 21; CGI arts. 964, 965, 973 I, 974, 990 D–990 E; BOI-INT-DG-20-20-80; the notarial scale; DVF (the French government's transaction register) — texts read. Scope note: the figures are the statutory scales applied to a median, not a quotation for a particular deed.

Reviewed as at 11 August 2026 · 1964 convention art. 2; CGI arts. 964, 965, 973 I, 974, 990 D–990 E — texts read; DVF medians

3Five ways to own a French property, and the one that two countries read differently

On most pairs the ownership question changes the paperwork. Here it changes which country thinks it may tax you, and the disagreement is between two supreme readings rather than between advisers.

Direct ownership

Simplicity, and no disagreement anywhere. Article 3 §1 makes the rent taxable only in France and §4 does the same for the sale profit; Belgium exempts both while keeping the rate. At death article 4 of the 1959 convention gives the property to France, and article 10 lets Belgium tax its resident's worldwide estate with a credit for the French duty on immovables.

A French property company (SCI) — where the two states part company

France taxes a Belgian resident's gain on the shares. The route to that answer runs through the final protocol's point 2, which on its own terms covers only attribution companies; the administration reads it as non-exhaustive and extends it to ordinary property-rich companies, and the Conseil d'État upheld that reading on 24 February 2020 (n° 436392), so CGI article 244 bis A applies. Belgian courts have characterised the same shares as movable property, which under the 1964 text sends them to the residuary article and to Belgium alone — where gains realised in the normal management of private wealth are as a rule untaxed. That combination once read as a gap. It no longer does: the French side of it has been closed since the commentary of 2012 and the decision of 2020, and what remains is two states with incompatible readings of the same asset. The 2021 convention would settle it outright at its article 13 §2 when it enters force. A family holding through an SCI should know that it is exposed to a disagreement, not sheltered by one.

At death the same shares behave completely differently, and that is in § 6.

A Belgian or other EU company

The 3% annual charge of articles 990 D to 990 E applies with an exemption on filing for EU-established entities. French corporation tax reaches French property income. The question above about how the shares are classified follows the shares wherever the company is established.

A trust or foundation

French law meets trusts on its own terms without waiting for either convention: the trustee reports under CGI article 1649 AB, assets within scope enter the settlor's taxable estate or that of a beneficiary treated as the settlor, and the levy of article 990 J answers a failure to declare. Belgian law has its own view of foreign arrangements and it belongs with counsel there.

Splitting ownership between generations

Giving the bare ownership while keeping the use for life is a French civil mechanism whose values are fixed by statute — CGI article 669 by the giver's age, article 751 where both halves are held in one family. It is a gift, and on this pair that word carries unusual weight: gifts are outside the 1959 convention entirely, so the favourable death treatment of § 6 does not extend to them.

Sources considered: 1964 convention arts. 3, 15, 18 and final protocol point 2; CE, 24 February 2020, n° 436392 — decision text read; BOI-INT-CVB-BEL-10-10 §130; the 2021 text (signed, not in force) art. 13 §2; CGI arts. 244 bis A, 990 D–990 E, 990 J, 1649 AB, 669, 751 — texts read. Scope note: the Belgian classification and the Belgian treatment of trusts are stated at orientation level and are questions for counsel in Belgium; structures are presented for analysis, never as recommendations.

Reviewed as at 11 August 2026 · 1964 convention art. 3 + final protocol pt 2; CE n° 436392 — decision text read; CGI arts. 244 bis A, 990 D–E, 990 J, 1649 AB, 669, 751

4What you pay when you sell — and the two costs an EU seller does not carry

France taxes the gain, and on this pair it does so exclusively: article 3 §§1 and 4 of the 1964 convention leave the profit on selling French property taxable only where the property stands. CGI article 244 bis A charges it — 19% income tax, plus the social levies, plus the surcharge of article 1609 nonies G on the larger gains. The taxable gain falls with holding time under CGI article 150 VC — 6% a year from the sixth year to the twenty-first and 4% in the twenty-second for the income-tax component, which therefore clears at 22 years, with the social-levy component running to 30. Works and acquisition costs enter the calculation on evidence, which is the practical argument for keeping invoices from the first year of ownership.

The reduced solidarity levy applies here

The solidarity levy falls below the full 17.2% for persons affiliated to a social-security scheme within the European coordination regulation, and Belgian affiliation is inside it. It is a fact about the seller's affiliation rather than their nationality or the location of the property, so it is evidenced at the deed rather than assumed.

No accredited representative

Because Belgium is an EU member state, the accredited tax representative required of third-country sellers is dispensed with under CGI article 244 bis A, IV bis. That removes a cost and a step from the sale which most pairs in this collection carry.

Belgium then exempts

Article 19-A of the 1964 convention has Belgium exempt income the convention makes taxable in France, while keeping the right to set the rate on the rest. So a French sale ordinarily produces no Belgian charge and no Belgian credit computation — only a rate effect. If the sale is of SCI shares rather than the property, read § 3 first: that is the case the two states characterise differently.

Leaving France after a sale

France's exit tax (CGI article 167 bis) concerns securities and company rights held on departure by a person leaving French residence after at least six of the previous ten years. It does not reach the property itself and is not triggered by selling one. The convention signed in 2021 would add a clause on former residents — six of ten years, a holding of at least a quarter of the profit rights, a seven-year window — which is a reason to watch its ratification rather than a rule today.

Sources considered: 1964 convention arts. 3 §§1 and 4, 19-A; the 2021 text (signed, not in force) art. 13 §4; CGI arts. 244 bis A (incl. IV bis), 150 VC, 200 B, 1609 nonies G, 167 bis; BOI-RFPI-PVINR-20-20 — texts read. Scope note: the Belgian computation is orientation only.

Reviewed as at 11 August 2026 · 1964 convention arts. 3, 19-A; CGI arts. 244 bis A, 150 VC, 200 B, 1609 nonies G, 167 bis

5Renting before you buy, and renting your property out

A family often rents on the coast for a season before buying, and the two positions are not symmetrical. As a tenant of a furnished seasonal let, you are a customer: the rent carries no French tax consequence for you, the deposit and inventory are governed by the lease, and the tourist tax is collected by the landlord.

As an owner renting the property out

This is the cleanest answer in the brief. Article 3 §1 of the 1964 convention makes income from property taxable ONLY in the country where the property stands, and §4 confirms that direct use, renting out and any other form of exploitation are all within it. France taxes under its own rules — the progressive scale with a 20% minimum rate up to the second bracket ceiling and 30% beyond, unless a lower worldwide rate is demonstrated (article 197 A) — with the social levies at the reduced solidarity rate for a Belgian-affiliated owner.

Belgium then exempts the income under article 19-A while keeping the right to set the rate on the rest of that person's income. So a Belgian owner files in France for the tax and declares in Belgium for the rate. The Belgian filing mechanics belong with advisers there.

Furnished renting, and the rules that came with it

Renting furnished is a different French regime from renting unfurnished, with its own thresholds and its own allowances, and short-term seasonal renting on the coast now sits under communal registration and quota rules that vary from one commune to the next. Cannes, Antibes and Saint-Tropez do not answer the same way. The rules bear on the yield rather than on the deed, so they are checked before a purchase made for rental return, not after.

Sources considered: 1964 convention arts. 3 §§1 and 4, 19-A §§2 and 4; CGI art. 197 A; BOI-INT-CVB-BEL-10-50; BOI-RFPI-PVINR-20-20 — texts read. Scope note: the Belgian return is stated at orientation level; communal registration rules change by commune and by year.

Reviewed as at 11 August 2026 · 1964 convention arts. 3, 19-A; CGI art. 197 A

6What happens to the property when you die, or give it away

Here this pair has something almost no other has: a convention written for death, in force since 1959 and untouched by the text signed in 2021. It repays reading closely, because what it does to the property and what it does to shares in a company are not the same thing at all.

The property itself

Article 4 gives immovable property to the state where it stands, so the French property bears French succession duty — the scale of CGI article 777 to 45% in the direct line after the allowance of article 779, €100,000 per child, with the surviving spouse exempt. A claim secured by a mortgage is expressly NOT immovable for this purpose. Article 9 lets debts secured on the assets covered by articles 4 to 7 be deducted from those assets. Article 10 then does the coordination: each state keeps the right to compute its own tax at the rate it would have applied to the whole estate, and the state where the deceased was domiciled may tax assets standing in the other state while giving a credit for the tax paid there. Belgium taxes its residents' worldwide estates and credits foreign tax on immovables.

The shares, which is the fact worth the reading

Article 8 is the residuary rule: property not covered by articles 4 to 7 is taxable ONLY in the state where the deceased was domiciled. Shares in a French company are not immovable property under this convention, so they fall to article 8 — so for a Belgian-domiciled deceased they are taxable only in Belgium, and outside French succession duty altogether. The administration's own commentary names what escapes: shares held in French companies, claims on French debtors, French securities — subject to the rate reserve of article 10. This is the single most valuable fact on the pair, and it turns entirely on domicile, which is a question of fact rather than of paperwork.

And now the asymmetry

GIFTS ARE ENTIRELY OUTSIDE THE 1959 CONVENTION. Lifetime transfers remain under ordinary domestic law, so CGI article 750 ter applies in full — including its rule counting shares of a property-rich company as French assets where the family holds more than half the interests. So the same shares that pass free of French duty at death meet French gift duty if they are given during life. That is the reverse of the France–Canada position in this collection, where the death is bridged by treaty and the gift is not covered — and it is the reason a plan built on giving early can cost more here than doing nothing. This is settled by reading the instrument; it should not be assumed in either direction.

Who inherits, which is a different question

French forced heirship reserves a share of the estate for the children (Code civil articles 912 and 913), and the succession convention settles the tax rather than the devolution. European Regulation 650/2012 lets a person choose the law of their nationality to govern the succession, which changes who inherits and in what shares; it does not move the tax. Whether the compensatory levy of Code civil article 913, al. 3 could operate depends on whether the chosen law protects the children, which is a question of that law rather than of French law.

Sources considered: 1959 succession convention arts. 4, 8, 9, 10 a and b; BOI-INT-CVB-BEL-20 §§30, 40 and 140; CGI arts. 750 ter, 777, 779, 669, 751; Code civil arts. 912–913; EU Regulation 650/2012 — texts read. Scope note: the Belgian charge on a worldwide estate and its credit rules are stated at orientation level and are questions for counsel in Belgium; civil law runs before tax law in this section.

Reviewed as at 11 August 2026 · 1959 succession convention arts. 4, 8, 9, 10; BOI-INT-CVB-BEL-20; CGI arts. 750 ter, 777, 779 — texts read

7The eight questions Belgian owners ask most

Is there a succession treaty between France and Belgium?

Yes — one of the few in this collection, in force since 1959 and untouched by the convention signed in 2021. Article 4 gives the property to France; article 10 lets Belgium tax its resident's worldwide estate with a credit for the French duty on immovables.

Do shares in my French SCI bear French succession duty?

For a Belgian-domiciled deceased, no. They fall to the residuary article 8, taxable only where the deceased was domiciled. It is the pair's most valuable fact and it turns on domicile as a matter of fact.

Can I give those shares to my children instead?

You can, but not on the same footing. Gifts are outside the 1959 convention, so CGI article 750 ter applies in full and reaches property-rich company shares. What passes free at death is taxed if given.

Who taxes the gain if I sell the SCI rather than the property?

France does, and this is the one place the two countries disagree. The administration reads the final protocol as covering ordinary property-rich companies and the Conseil d'État upheld that in 2020; Belgian courts read the same shares as movable and residence-taxable. Treat it as dispute space rather than a plan.

Does a Belgian resident pay French wealth tax?

Yes above €1.3M. The 1964 convention has no wealth article, so the charge runs on French domestic law with no treaty restriction. The 2021 text would name it expressly and confirm France's right.

Is my French rent taxed in Belgium too?

No. Article 3 §1 makes it taxable only in France, and Belgium exempts it under article 19-A while keeping the right to set the rate on your other income.

Do I need a tax representative to sell?

No. Belgium is in the EU, so the requirement is dispensed with under CGI article 244 bis A, IV bis.

When will the 2021 convention apply?

Nobody can say. France has not tabled the approval bill and none of the six Belgian assemblies has ratified; the most recent parliamentary answers report no timetable. Until then the 1964 and 1959 texts are the law, and this brief restates the position at each edition.

Sources considered: 1964 convention arts. 3, 19-A and final protocol point 2; 1959 succession convention arts. 4, 8, 10; the 2021 text (signed, not in force); CE n° 436392; CGI arts. 964, 750 ter, 244 bis A — texts read. Scope note: these answers condense the sections above and inherit their scope notes.

Reviewed as at 11 August 2026

8The court decisions, the sources and the sales behind this brief

Every legal statement in this brief was checked against the text it comes from, in the Chiron Legal Corpus, at the date on each section stamp. Both conventions in force, the final protocol and the signed 2021 text were read end to end at this edition.

What the protocol re-reading established

Point 2 of the 1964 final protocol covers companies whose sole object is building or acquiring buildings for division among their members. Everything beyond that — the ordinary property-rich SCI — comes from the administration reading the point as non-exhaustive, a reading the Conseil d'État upheld on 24 February 2020 (n° 436392). Saying which part is text and which part is reading matters here, because the Belgian courts have gone the other way on the same shares and a reader is entitled to know exactly where the disagreement starts.

Across the pairs migrated in this pass the protocol question has now produced four different answers: no protocol at all (France–Singapore, France–Ireland); a protocol carrying an operative rule that moves rates (France–India); a protocol that exists and says nothing about property (France–Poland); and here, a protocol that is load-bearing but narrower than the rule it is cited for. There is no way to know which without reading it.

What the courts have decided

The decision that matters to an owner is CE, 24 February 2020, n° 436392, which upheld the administration's reading of the final protocol and so confirmed that France taxes a Belgian resident's gain on the shares of a property-rich SCI. The Belgian line of authority runs the other way and is reported here at orientation level, because it is not our agency's law to state.

The market figures

The sales figures come from DVF, the French government's register of property transactions, covering twelve years. In the ownership observatory our agency maintains, the Belgian sample is thin and is reported as proportions rather than counts; what it does show is that Belgian-held positions skew towards company ownership rather than direct holding, which is why § 3 carries the weight it does on this pair.

What this brief is not

It states the general position on the French side and reads the Belgian side at orientation level only. It is not advice on a particular file, and it does not replace a notaire, a French tax counsel or an adviser in Belgium — which matters most on the share question, where the two countries do not agree. Write to us directly for a file-specific reading.

Sources considered: 1964 convention (official consolidation with the multilateral instrument) and its final protocol; 1959 succession convention; the convention signed 9 November 2021, not in force; BOI-INT-CVB-BEL-10-10, -10-50 and -20; BOI-INT-DG-20-20-80; BOI-RFPI-PVINR-20-20; CE, 24 February 2020, n° 436392 — decision text read; the CGI and Code civil articles cited in each section; DVF. Scope note: the administration's commentary predates the 2021 signature, so where commentary and treaty texts diverge this brief follows the texts.

Reviewed as at 11 August 2026 · 1964 convention + final protocol; 1959 succession convention; CE n° 436392 — decision text read; DVF

Further intelligence

The Riviera villa market — the coast-wide €3M+ index

Riviera property tax & relocation — the incoming buyer's primer

France–Switzerland — the convention pair

France–Brazil — the convention pair

Nederlandse editie