France–the Nordics — The Riviera Private Wealth Brief

0Executive summary

Law reviewed as at 19 July 2026 — verified against Légifrance and BOFiP through the Chiron Legal Corpus

1The conventions — Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland

The four treaty situations are summarised first, in the form this brief keeps throughout: one line per flag, the prose only where the regimes genuinely differ.

The Danish interval deserves its dates. Denmark denounced the convention of 8 February 1957 with effect from 1 January 2009, and until the end of 2023 no income-tax treaty bound the two states: French domestic withholding applied in full to Danish residents, softened only by a published administrative doctrine allowing refund of the excess over the tax a French resident would have borne, a mechanism whose terms the Conseil d'État confirmed in its decision n° 413935 of 24 October 2018. The convention of 4 February 2022, approved by the law of 22 December 2023 and published by decree of 5 January 2024, closed the interval on the modern model: BEPS preamble, a principal-purpose article under which a treaty advantage can be refused where obtaining it was a principal object of an arrangement, and a 365-day property-rich clause for share gains. Its scope, however, is deliberately narrow — income taxes alone, the French list naming income tax, corporation tax and the social contributions, and the wealth tax nowhere.

Residence does the sorting on every instrument in force. Each of the three income conventions, and both succession conventions, settles dual residence or dual domicile on the familiar cascade: permanent home, then centre of vital interests, then habitual abode, then nationality. The Swedish succession convention adds a trailing clause of its own — a deceased or donor who had been domiciled in the other state for at least five of the preceding seven years, and held that state's nationality, leaves it a residual taxing right with a credit (art. 12 §3) — a provision worth a calendar check in any recent relocation.

The multilateral instrument divides the bloc. Finland listed its France convention, so the 1970 text is applied in the consolidated presentation that carries the BEPS preamble and the principal-purpose test. Norway and Sweden left their France conventions off their lists; Norway's instrument accordingly stands as amended through 1999, while Sweden and France signed a bilateral avenant on 22 May 2023 to add the same preamble and principal-purpose article — approved on the French side by law n° 2026-510 of 15 June 2026 and awaiting entry into force, as section 4 records. Denmark's 2022 text was born with the clauses built in.

The home-country accents are stated here at orientation level only. Sweden has levied no inheritance or gift tax since 2005 and no wealth tax since 2007; Norway abolished its inheritance tax in 2014 yet keeps its wealth tax, the formuesskatt; Denmark levies estate duty, and Finland an inheritance tax of its own. Iceland, whose residents hold no position in the ownership study of section 2, shares the levy and representation treatment described below for Norway as an EEA member; its conventions with France are otherwise outside this brief's scope. The Nordic side of every question belongs with the family's advisers in the home jurisdiction.

Law reviewed as at 19 July 2026 — verified against Légifrance and BOFiP through the Chiron Legal Corpus · DK convention 2022 arts. 1–2, 29; CE n° 413935 (24 Oct 2018); SE conventions 1990 art. 2 & 1994 arts. 1, 4, 12 §3; NO convention 1980 arts. 2, 4 (avenant 1984); FI conventions 1970 (CML consolidation) & 1958; Sénat rap. l17-410 (MLI lists)

2The market seen from the Nordics

Seen from the Nordic capitals, the Riviera's €3M+ villa market leads emphatically with Cannes. Cannes and its hills — the Super Cannes quarter on the Vallauris side included, with the Théoule shore immediately west — contributed 306 qualified sales for €2,066M across 2014–2025, at a €4.9M median and a €46.5M ceiling, with 37% of value in eight-figure transactions. The Saint-Tropez peninsula remains the largest €3M+ register on the coast, at 1006 sales for €7,049M, while Saint-Jean-Cap-Ferrat is its narrowest and most expensive: 178 sales for €2,375M at a €6.5M median and a €200.0M ceiling. The past 36 months alone account for €3,970M across the three.

Source: DVF (« Demandes de Valeurs Foncières », DGFiP), villa sales ≥ €3M, 2014–2025, estate-deduplicated — the same convention as the published Riviera Intelligence hub, so this brief and the public pages cannot disagree. DVF through 2025-12-31.

Ownership, in aggregate

The public record itself describes how the Riviera is held. This brief reads it in aggregate — the State's transaction register alongside the public company registers, all of it already published, anonymised in processing, and with no individual holding ever identified. Across 20 Riviera communes, 29% of the ownership positions studied are held from outside France, and the four Nordic flags together account for 15% of those foreign-held positions — a bloc of the same order as the largest single European residences. Within the bloc, Norway and Sweden each represent 44% of Nordic-held positions and Denmark the remainder; no Finland-resident and no Iceland-resident position appears in the current study. The concentration is unusually sharp: Cannes and its hills, the Vallauris side included, together with the Théoule shore just west, carry nearly all of it. One structural fact stands out — 94% of Nordic-resident positions are held in direct personal ownership, without a company in the chain, a directness that sections I bis examines against four very different succession regimes.

Aggregates only, drawn from public sources under their re-use conditions; no individual holding is identified or published. Residence attribution follows the address of record. Figures refresh with each edition.

Law reviewed as at 19 July 2026 — verified against Légifrance and BOFiP through the Chiron Legal Corpus · DVF register, estate-deduplicated · ownership aggregates from public registers only

IBuying in France as a Nordic resident

The process and its costs

The acquisition follows the standard French sequence: offer, compromis de vente with a ten-day cooling-off period, deposit of customarily 10%, conditions precedent, and the authentic deed before the notaire, who collects the duties and registers title. The notaire acts as a public officer rather than as the buyer's counsel, and Nordic buyers typically retain their own advisers in addition. Because the four succession positions described in section I bis diverge sharply — two conventions, two none — the structure questions deserve to be answered before the compromis is signed; the acquiring vehicle is difficult to change once the process is under way.

The cost of owning — four answers to one wealth tax

CGI article 964 institutes the annual tax on real-estate wealth above €1,300,000 of taxable assets. For persons not domiciled in France the base comprises French-situs property together with the fraction of any company's shares representing French property (article 964-2°). What differs across the bloc is the treaty setting. A Danish resident bears the IFI on domestic law alone: the 2022 convention covers income taxes only, so the charge is neither sheltered nor framed by treaty — though Denmark levies no wealth tax of its own, so it is never doubled. A Swedish resident holds the opposite position: the 1990 convention names the French wealth tax, article 22 assigns French-situs property — and shares of companies whose assets are principally French real estate — to France, and Sweden, without a wealth tax since 2007, adds nothing on top. A Norwegian resident alone can expect part of the charge back: article 23 §1 assigns the villa's wealth to France, with mortgage debt deductible in France on the same terms as for residents (art. 23 §1 b), and article 24 §2 obliges Norway to deduct the French wealth tax from the formuesskatt it levies on the same elements, within the fraction attributable to them. A Finnish resident is covered today by the 1970 convention's fortune chapter — article 22 §1 assigns the villa to France and Finland exempts it with progression — yet the convention signed on 4 April 2023 to replace the 1970 text covers income only, so that cover is scheduled to lapse with the changeover recorded in section 4.

The statute itself contains one planning window common to all four flags: a person who becomes French-domiciled after five years abroad is taxed for five years on French assets only (article 964-1°, al. 2). No Nordic instrument hardens that window into a treaty right, so it remains a matter of French domestic law, worth dating precisely in any relocation plan. Recurring charges follow the property: taxe foncière at communal rates; for furnished secondary residences, communes in the zone tendue — a category that includes the marquee Riviera communes — may vote a surtaxe on the taxe d'habitation for second homes; and the annual occupancy declaration is required of all owners. Because these rates are communal and year-specific, this brief's edition cycle re-verifies them rather than freezing them.

Law reviewed as at 19 July 2026 — verified against Légifrance and BOFiP through the Chiron Legal Corpus · CGI arts. 964–965; SE 1990 convention art. 22; NO 1980 convention arts. 23, 24 §2; FI 1970 consolidation arts. 22, 23 §2; cost scales stated for orientation, itemised at engagement

I bisStructures, as questions

The structure question, four times over

Holding structures are presented here, in keeping with this line's doctrine, as questions for analysis rather than as recommendations. For the Nordic flags the organising fact is the split recorded in section 1: Sweden and Finland transmit under a convention, Denmark and Norway under French domestic law alone — and the four regimes reward the same wrapper very differently.

The heir's residence follows the same split. Where no convention constrains France — Denmark and Norway — an heir who has been French-domiciled for six of the ten preceding years brings worldwide receipts within French duty (art. 750 ter 3°), with the unilateral credit of article 784 A for foreign tax on foreign assets. The Swedish and Finnish conventions, by contrast, allocate their residual classes exclusively to the deceased's domicile state, and as a rule that exclusivity leaves no room for the beneficiary-side rule on the assets so assigned; the reading is confirmed case by case at engagement. Where French duty applies, the scale is that of CGI article 777 — progressive to 45% in the direct line beyond €1.8M per share, after the €100,000 per-child allowance of article 779, the surviving spouse exempt in succession — and the civil law decides first: for a succession opened in France the French courts apply the European succession regulation (EU Reg. 650/2012), under which a Nordic national habitually resident in France may in principle elect the law of nationality for the succession as a whole. How that election is received at home — Denmark and Norway stand outside the regulation — is examined with counsel on both sides before the compromis.

Debt against the IFI — what the code anticipates

The financing conversation runs here as it does elsewhere on this coast: a loan from the buyer's bank, secured on a pledged portfolio, so that liquidity remains invested while the debt reduces the taxable base. The mechanics are lawful and the code anticipates them. Acquisition debt owed to a bank is deductible from the IFI base under CGI article 974, while financial assets sit outside that base altogether. The boundaries are three: loans repaying capital at term are deemed to amortise, the deduction declining pro rata over the loan's life and by one twentieth a year where no term is fixed; where taxable property exceeds €5M and debts exceed 60% of its value, the excess is deductible only as to half, unless the borrower shows the loan was not contracted mainly for tax; and the debt must be real — actually drawn, actually serviced, at market terms, since routed through a shareholder account of an SCI it ceases to count for valuing the shares (article 973). For a Norwegian owner the deduction carries a treaty echo: article 23 §1 b of the 1980 convention itself requires France to deduct mortgage debt on the villa on resident terms, and the credited IFI of article 24 §2 then shrinks with the base. Leverage moderates the IFI in its early years and fades by design — a calendar best examined before the compromis rather than after.

The démembrement — bare ownership gifted, use retained

The structure commonly proposed alongside the loan divides ownership itself: the buyer retains the usufruct, the use of the villa and its income for life, and gifts the bare ownership to the next generation. The code values the split by age: under the scale of CGI article 669, bare ownership represents 60% of full value where the usufructuary is between 61 and 70, and 70% between 71 and 80; the gift bears duty on that fraction alone, at today's value, and the reunification of full ownership at the usufructuary's death is not a further taxable transmission, provided the conditions of article 751 are met — a notarised gift, made more than three months before death, valued on the article 669 scale. Article 968 keeps the full value within the usufructuary's IFI base, so the wealth tax is unmoved. The treaty setting follows the section's split: for a Swedish donor the gift stays within the 1994 convention's allocation; for Danish, Norwegian and Finnish donors it is a purely French charge on the French fraction, with any home-country gift tax — Denmark and Finland levy one, Norway does not — answered by the family's home advisers. The forced-heirship consequences of a gift to children belong with counsel, alongside the choice-of-law election noted above.

Law reviewed as at 19 July 2026 — verified against Légifrance and BOFiP through the Chiron Legal Corpus · CGI arts. 669, 750 ter, 751, 777, 779, 784 A, 968, 973–974; SE 1994 convention arts. 5, 9, 12; FI 1958 convention arts. 3, 7; NO 1980 convention arts. 23 §1 b, 24 §2; EU Reg. 650/2012

IISelling as a Nordic resident

France taxes first, and all four instruments in force confirm it. Gains on the villa itself go to the situs state under each text — article 13 §1 of the Danish, Swedish and Norwegian conventions and of the Finnish consolidation alike. Property-rich shares follow, by four differently drafted routes: the Danish convention and the Finnish consolidation carry the modern 365-day clause, reaching shares that drew more than half their value from French real estate at any time in the year before the sale; the Swedish convention and the Norwegian protocol assign such gains to France where French law taxes them as real-estate gains, which it does. For every Nordic seller the French charge runs under CGI article 244 bis A: the taxable gain is reduced by an ownership-duration allowance of 6% for each year of ownership beyond the fifth and 4% for the twenty-second (article 150 VC), the income-tax component then applying at 19% (article 200 B) and extinguishing after 22 years, and taxable gains above €50,000 bearing in addition the progressive surcharge of article 1609 nonies G, which reaches 6% at the levels this market transacts.

Two French formalities land identically across the bloc, one of them by an EEA route worth naming. Sellers affiliated to a Danish, Swedish, Finnish or Norwegian social-security scheme — and not charged to a French one — are exempt from CSG and CRDS on the gain and bear only the 7.5% solidarity levy (CGI art. 235 ter; CSS art. L. 136-7, I ter), since the coordination regulation the exemption references covers the EEA as well as the Union; the full 17.2% remains the third-country rate. And none of the four needs an accredited fiscal representative: the dispensation of article 244 bis A, IV bis covers EU sellers and, among EEA states, precisely those bound to France by administrative-assistance and recovery conventions — the administration names Iceland and Norway, and excludes Liechtenstein. Both points are verified to the seller's actual affiliation at engagement.

The home state then answers by credit — except Finland, by exemption. Denmark deducts the French tax from its own on the same income (2022 convention, art. 22 §1); Sweden does the same (1990 convention, art. 23 §2); Norway likewise, for income and for wealth (art. 24 §2); Finland exempts the gain with progression (1970 consolidation, art. 23 §2). Where the property is held through a company, the choice between selling the asset and selling the shares alters the pool of buyers, the French analysis and the home-country method together; that choice is best evaluated before marketing begins rather than in the course of negotiation.

Leaving after the sale — a note on the exit tax

Families who sell and then move away from France sometimes ask whether an exit charge applies on departure. The answer is narrower than the name suggests. France's exit tax (CGI article 167 bis) is aimed at securities, not at property: it concerns persons who were French-domiciled for at least six of the ten years before leaving, and taxes the unrealised gains on substantial securities holdings — positions whose combined value exceeds €800,000, or stakes of 50% or more in a company's profits, the second criterion catching a controlling holding whatever its value — as they stand on the day of departure. A villa already sold has settled its own tax under the regimes above, and the sale proceeds themselves are not within the charge. Shares of a family SCI follow the property rather than the portfolio: so long as the company keeps the ordinary income-tax regime, gains on its property-rich shares remain within the real-estate regime (CGI article 150 UB) and outside the exit tax — the French right to tax a later sale being preserved instead by article 244 bis A. A company that has opted for corporation tax changes the classification, and with it the analysis; the option belongs on the pre-departure checklist. The residence condition matters equally: a person who leaves before six years of French domicile within the preceding ten stands outside the latent-gains charge altogether, so the family that tried France for a few years and moved on typically departs untouched; gains already placed under a tax deferral follow their own rules and are reviewed at engagement. Where the machinery does apply, payment is generally deferred, and the assessment lapses automatically where the securities are still held two years after departure — five where the portfolio exceeded €2.57M — or upon a return to France. For most sellers the exit tax is therefore a question of calendar and paperwork rather than of cost; the destination-specific mechanics of the deferral are settled at engagement.

Law reviewed as at 19 July 2026 — verified against Légifrance and BOFiP through the Chiron Legal Corpus · CGI arts. 150 UB, 150 VC, 167 bis, 200 B, 235 ter, 244 bis A (incl. IV bis), 1609 nonies G; CSS art. L. 136-7 I ter; DK convention arts. 13, 22; SE 1990 arts. 13, 23; NO 1980 art. 13 + protocol §5, art. 24; FI 1970 arts. 13, 23; BOI-RFPI-PVINR-30-20 (22 Jan 2025)

IIIRenting — as tenant and as owner

Renting as a tenant

A rental year before purchase remains the classic first step, and it carries one caution worth stating clearly: French tax domicile under CGI article 4 B turns on the location of the foyer, the principal place of stay, and the centres of professional and economic interest — none of which defers to a lease. A Riviera villa that becomes the family's effective home can establish French residence, with worldwide consequences, well before any purchase; the tie-breakers of the four conventions then arbitrate, on the cascade described in section 1, and the Swedish succession convention's five-of-seven-years clause gives that family's calendar an additional reading of its own. The choice between furnished seasonal lettings and the one-to-three-year civil lease determines exit flexibility, and is best matched to the trial's real purpose.

Renting the villa out

French-source rental income of non-residents — the furnished lettings common at this price point included — is taxed under the minimum-rate regime of CGI article 197 A, at no less than 20% up to the second-bracket ceiling and 30% above it, unless the taxpayer demonstrates a lower worldwide effective rate; social levies apply in addition, for Nordic-affiliated owners generally at the 7.5% solidarity rate described in section II, verified at engagement. The allocation is uniform across the bloc: all four conventions make income from immovable property taxable in the state where the property stands (article 6 of each text), the home state then relieving by its own method — credit in Denmark, Sweden and Norway, exemption with progression in Finland. How the relief is returned at home belongs with the family's Nordic advisers.

Law reviewed as at 19 July 2026 — verified against Légifrance and BOFiP through the Chiron Legal Corpus · CGI arts. 4 B, 197 A; art. 6 of the DK 2022, SE 1990, NO 1980 and FI 1970 texts

4What changed

Edition 1 — baseline (July 2026). The instruments as they stand: the France–Denmark convention of 4 February 2022 (in force 29 December 2023, applying from 1 January 2024); the France–Sweden conventions of 27 November 1990 (income and fortune) and 8 June 1994 (successions and gifts); the France–Norway convention of 19 December 1980 as amended by the avenants of 1984, 1995 and 1999; and the France–Finland convention of 11 September 1970 as modified by the multilateral instrument, beside the succession convention of 25 August 1958. One calendar item leads the file: law n° 2026-510 of 15 June 2026 authorised French approval of both the new France–Finland convention signed 4 April 2023 — an income-only text that will replace the 1970 convention and retire, with it, the fortune chapter that today gives a Finnish resident's IFI its treaty frame — and the France–Sweden avenant of 22 May 2023, which adds the BEPS preamble and a principal-purpose article to the 1990 convention. Neither instrument is yet in force; entry follows the exchange of notifications, and edition 2 will record the decrees and effective dates. Further watch items: annual Loi de finances movements on the IFI and transfer duties; communal surtaxe votes on the Riviera arc; Nordic legislation on wealth and death taxation; and the commentary vintages — the administration's Denmark pages are current (21 May 2025), while the Norway commentary dates from 2012 and predates the IFI, and the Sweden page confines itself to information exchange, so on both of those relationships this brief follows the treaty texts. The ownership aggregates of section 2 are refreshed with each edition.

Law reviewed as at 19 July 2026 — verified against Légifrance and BOFiP through the Chiron Legal Corpus

5Questions, answered

Does a Nordic resident pay French wealth tax on a Riviera villa?

Yes, once French real-estate assets exceed €1.3M, whether held directly or through the property fraction of company shares (CGI art. 964). The setting differs by flag: Denmark's 2022 convention is income-only, so the charge rests on domestic law alone; Sweden's and Norway's conventions, and Finland's for now, assign it to France by treaty — and Norway alone credits the French tax against its own wealth tax (1980 convention, art. 24 §2).

Is there a tax treaty between France and Denmark?

Yes, since recently: the convention of 4 February 2022, in force 29 December 2023 and applying from 1 January 2024, ended a fifteen-year interval that followed Denmark's denunciation of the 1957 convention. It covers income taxes only — no wealth-tax article, and no succession convention exists between the two states.

Which country taxes the succession on a French villa owned from the Nordics?

France, in all four cases, as the state where the property stands — under the 1994 convention for Sweden, the 1958 convention for Finland, and CGI article 750 ter alone for Denmark and Norway. What differs is the home side: Sweden and Norway levy no inheritance tax, while Denmark and Finland tax under their own law.

Does Sweden's abolition of inheritance tax mean a Swedish family pays nothing at death?

Not on the villa. The 1994 convention still allocates French-situs property — and property-rich shares — to France, so French succession duty applies in full; what Sweden abolished in 2005 is only its own side of the allocation. Portfolio assets assigned exclusively to Sweden by article 9 do, however, pass untaxed.

Who taxes the gain when a Nordic resident sells a French villa?

France, as the situs state under all four instruments, through CGI article 244 bis A with the ownership-duration allowances — the income-tax component extinguishing after 22 years and the social levies after 30. Denmark, Sweden and Norway then credit the French tax at home; Finland exempts the gain with progression.

Does a Nordic seller need a fiscal representative in France?

No. The dispensation of article 244 bis A, IV bis covers sellers resident in the EU — Denmark, Sweden and Finland — and, among EEA states, those bound to France by administrative-assistance and recovery conventions, a condition the administration confirms for Norway and Iceland. Sellers affiliated to a Nordic social-security scheme also bear the 7.5% solidarity levy in place of the full 17.2% social charges.

Is rental income from France taxed if the owner lives in the Nordics?

Yes, by France first: all four conventions make income from immovable property taxable in the situs state (article 6), and France applies the minimum-rate regime of CGI article 197 A, at no less than 20% and 30%, with social levies in addition. Denmark, Sweden and Norway relieve by credit at home; Finland exempts with progression.

Does a French exit tax apply after selling and leaving?

Rarely, and never on the villa itself. The charge (CGI art. 167 bis) reaches only persons French-domiciled for six of the ten years before departure, and only their unrealised gains on securities — above €800,000 in value, or stakes of 50% or more of a company's profits; the sold villa and its proceeds stand outside, as do family-SCI shares kept under the ordinary income-tax regime (art. 150 UB). Where it does apply, payment is generally deferred and the assessment lapses after two years — five above €2.57M — or upon return to France.

What is the Chiron Legal Corpus?

The Chiron Legal Corpus is the research library behind this brief, maintained by this office's offshore legal-research partner: an extensive cross-border collection of consolidated statutes, tax-authority doctrine, treaty instruments and case law, including the French primary sources in full text. Every statement of law in these pages is verified against it, re-checked against Légifrance and BOFiP at each edition, and stamped with its review date section by section.

Law reviewed as at 19 July 2026 — verified against Légifrance and BOFiP through the Chiron Legal Corpus

6Methodology, sources & qualifications

Method. Legal statements are verified against the Chiron Legal Corpus, the research library maintained by this office's offshore legal-research partner — an extensive cross-border and international collection of consolidated statutes, tax-authority doctrine, treaty instruments and case law, including French primary law held in full text and re-checked against the official sources at each edition. The review of 19 July 2026 covered Légifrance (CGI arts. 4 B, 150 UB, 150 VC, 167 bis, 197 A, 200 B, 235 ter, 244 bis A incl. IV bis, 669, 750 ter, 751, 777, 779, 784 A, 964–965, 968, 973–974, 983 — consolidated texts; CSS art. L. 136-7), the six treaty instruments in their official French presentations — the France–Denmark convention of 2022, the France–Sweden conventions of 1990 and 1994 with the avenant of 22 May 2023 (signed, not in force), the France–Norway convention of 1980 consolidated through the 1999 avenant with its protocol, and the France–Finland texts of 1970 (in the consolidation carrying the multilateral instrument) and 1958 — together with the administration's commentary (BOI-INT-CVB-DNK of 21 May 2025; BOI-INT-CVB-SWE, 2015; BOI-INT-CVB-NOR, 2012; BOI-INT-CVB-FIN-20, 2012; BOI-RFPI-PVINR-30-20 of 22 January 2025) and the Conseil d'État's decision n° 413935 of 24 October 2018 on the Danish interval. Where the commentary predates an instrument or the current wealth tax, this brief follows the treaty text. Nordic domestic law — the Swedish abolitions of 2005 and 2007, the Norwegian abolition of 2014 and its wealth tax, the Danish and Finnish death duties — is stated at orientation level from secondary sources and is never load-bearing for a legal claim. Market data: DVF (DGFiP), villa sales ≥ €3M, estate-deduplicated, register through 2025-12-31. Ownership aggregates: compiled from public land and company registers, anonymised, as at 19 July 2026. Items flagged "at engagement" — communal rates, social-levy affiliation, the Finnish reading of company shares under the 1958 convention, the deed-level gain base — are stated at mechanism level pending case-specific verification.

Qualification. This brief documents published law and public transaction data; it is research rather than personalised legal or tax advice, and individual circumstances — residence history, nationality, matrimonial regime, the chain of title — change outcomes. For a live transaction, this office coordinates the appropriate French counsel (avocat fiscaliste, notaire) and executes the property side.

Law reviewed as at 19 July 2026 — verified against Légifrance and BOFiP through the Chiron Legal Corpus

Further intelligence

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

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

France–Brazil — the convention pair

France–Netherlands — the convention pair

Svensk utgåva

Norsk utgave

Dansk udgave

Suomenkielinen laitos