Tax rulings by the Supreme Courts during the week of June 1–5, 2026
This week, the Constitutional Council and the Conseil d'Etat rulings on tax matters concerning:
the unconstitutionality of the provision allowing a person subject to an administrative garnishment against a third-party holder to be ordered to pay the tax debt of the taxpayer who is the subject of such garnishment in the event of a failure to respond toadministration letteradministration in the event of an erroneous response (Constitutional Council, June 5, 2026, No. 2026-1203 QPC – commentary and impact of the decision to be published tomorrow)
the filing of a QPC challenging the rule that lawyers who have not completed training through the CRFPA are ineligible for the CFE exemption during their first two years of practice (CE, 8th and 3rd Div., June 2, 2026, No. 514019, unpublished)
The deadline for filing claims regarding the research tax credit for SMEs (CE, 8th and 3rd Ch., June 2, 2026, No. 506731, Lebon T.)
For its part, the Court of Cassation has published rulings on cases concerning:
the fact that a company’s securities could not qualify under the Dutreil Pact because the company, which was engaged in audiovisual production, held assets unrelated to its business as well as cash and cash equivalents that “may have accounted for 90% of its gross assets” and the cash reserves “alone represented between seven and nine times the revenue for the fiscal year in question, more than fifteen times the amount of short-term debt, and between fifteen and twenty-seven times the profit earned during the fiscal year.” The Court clarifies that the fact that these assets and cash were acquired through its business operations is irrelevant (Cass. com., May 28, 2026,Nos. 25-12.610 and 25-12.612, unpublished)
the failure to recognize, as business assets, the portion of the value of shares in an SCI corresponding to the ownership of an apartment and shares in other SCIs. The Court upheld the appellate ruling, which had found that there was no obligation to hold these assets in light of prudential requirements (Cass. com., May 28, 2026, No. 25-12.946, unpublished)
This legal watch produced by Mispelon Avocat, a law firm specializing in French tax audit and French tax litigation. You can follow this legal watch subscribing to the newsletter via this link.