Does the transmission of information to the departmental anti-fraud task force preclude the 10-year statute of limitations?

In principle,administration have approximately three years to assess a company that has underpaid corporate income tax.

However, a special statute of limitations applies when deficiencies in tax returns are discovered in the course of other proceedings.

In this specific case, a company was subject to a URSSAF audit, which resulted in the issuance of a citation for the offense of employing undocumented workers.

These minutes were forwarded to the public prosecutor, andadministration , having been notified of this transmission, exercised their right to request access to the documents related to the proceedings from the public prosecutor.

Finding that this information had been obtained in the course of legal proceedings and that it had revealed facts sufficient to establish a tax liability,administration the extended statute of limitations.

The taxpayer challenged the application of this special deadline all the way to the Administrative Court of Appeals, arguing in particular that the documents had been forwarded to the Departmental Anti-Fraud Task Force and thatadministration had already received them before obtaining the information from the public prosecutor.

The Administrative Court of Appeals hearing the case will, however, rule that“in this case, while it does not appear from the investigation thatadministration , prior to exercising its right to disclose information on May 18, 2021, received the URSSAF report containing sufficient information to establish the disputed tax assessments, the fact thatadministration informed, through the CODAF of Ille-et-Vilaine, of the transmission of the URSSAF report to the public prosecutor on October 29, 2020—as it acknowledged in its defense briefs before the Administrative Court— is not sufficient to preclude the application of the special reassessment period provided for in Article L. 188 C of the Book of Tax Procedures, since the information consisting solely of this transmission of the report did not, as of that date, reveal sufficient evidence to enableadministration the deficiencies or omissions that led to the disputed tax assessments.”

The Court therefore upholds the tax assessment

CAA Nantes, April 14, 2026, No. 25NT02018

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.