Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+ France: Refusal to recognise civil partnership, Widower forced to sell home

[Equality Network]

EXCLUSIVE: Man forced to sell flat after French refuse to recognise civil partnership By Phoebe Ferris-Rotman

PinkNews, 7th August 2008:

EXCLUSIVE: Man forced to sell flat after French refuse to recognise civil partnership

A gay man has spoken of his anger after French authorities refused to recognise a UK civil partnership.

Fernando Soares, 54, lost his life partner of 31 years, Nigel, to a rare form of stomach cancer in March.

Five years ago and long before Nigel had developed cancer they bought a small house together in the village of Ceret, near Perpignan, France.

They were in a legally registered civil partnership (CP) and assumed that their partnership would be recognised in France.

The French equivalent, the pacte civil de solidarité, known as the PACS, is fully recognised in Britain.

However, when they went to see a notary last summer in France, because Nigel wanted to write a will, they found out that France does not recognise their CP and Mr Soares discovered he would have to pay a 60% inheritance tax on the property.

"It is unfair because Britain gives French PACS couples the same rights and benefits." Mr. Soares told PinkNews.co.uk
"We should have equal rights. The Civil Partnership Act recognises all legally registered partnerships in the world.

"For instance if you have your registration in Tasmania or Buenos Aires it is and will be recognised by the British government."

While it denies British CP recognition, France recognises same sex marriages from Holland.

Both registered same-sex partners and married people in France pay no inheritance taxes and they are both allowed to pass on their assets to their partners.

"The French government has suggested that British CP couples should "divorce" and register as a French PACS," said Mr Soares.

"That is something very difficult to do and it is ludicrous. Why we should cancel something legal and do the same in another country? And for me it is just impossible."

In 1968 a double taxation treaty, article 25, was created as a reciprocal agreement between France and UK.

The article states that nationals in France and the UK should not be treated differently as regards to tax if they are in the same situation.

The treaty was recently rewritten and signed by the French Minister of Finance in June 2008 with the non discrimination clause left intact.

Amanda McAlister, a British solicitor who specialises in CP is appalled by the situation.

She believes that the French government's stance is in breach of 'right to family life,' article 8 in the 1998 Human Rights Act guaranteed under the European Convention on Human Rights.

"The French are a nightmare in recognising other civil partnerships. The British are the best," a French notary told PinkNews.co.uk

"This is a case of nationality discrimination and sexual orientation discrimination. I have to sell my flat in London to pay the tax," Mr Soares said.

He has had little positive response from gay support groups or government officials.

The only support Mr Soares has received is from Michael Cashman, a member of the European Parliament for the West Midlands constituency.

[Equality Network]

MEP plans campaign to have UK civil partnerships recognised in Europe By Rachel Charman

PinkNews, 21st August 2008:

Liberal Democrat Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Sharon Bowles has revealed plans to campaign for the recognition of UK civil partnerships (CPs) in other EU states.

At present, the French equivalent of a civil partnership, known as a pacte civil de solidarité (PACS) is fully recognised in Britain, but France does not recognise UK CPs.

Earlier this month, PinkNews.co.uk spoke to Fernando Soares, a resident in France, who discovered that his UK CP to his late partner was not recognised in that country.

This meant that Mr Soares would have to pay 60% inheritance tax on their property, unlike a heterosexual married couple or civil partners in the UK, and so was forced to sell their home.

Ms Bowles told PinkNews.co.uk that situations such as that facing Mr Soares are common.

"Many EU countries have CPs," She said, "and most recognise other states' CPs, but civil partners do not necessarily get the treatment that they would in their country of origin.

"For example, in France, people with UK CPs are not recognised as their partner's next-of-kin in terms of tax.

The MEP plans to push for CPs to be recognised in this way, and has already taken the first steps in the campaign.

"I raised this issue with the French Justice Minister, Rachida Dati, in June, on a personal level. I have also written to her about it.

"Additionally, I have drafted a written declaration, with the participation of the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA) Europe, which will formally raise the matter in the European Parliament.

The declaration calls for "Member States with existing same-sex partnership legislation to recognise the arrangements of other Member States that have also made provisions for same-sex partnerships," and also "Calls upon the Commission to draw up guidelines for such mutual recognition by Member States with existing same-sex partnership legislation."

Written declarations have a lifetime of three months, after which, if has been signed by over half the MEPs, it will become a resolution.

Resolutions are then formally adopted by the European Parliament and forwarded to the Commission, Council and Member State governments for consideration.

"The declaration will be launched in the next few weeks," Ms Bowles continued, "and we are hoping for organisations to join the campaign and put pressure on MEPs to sign up.

"We are optimistic, because lots of declarations do move on in policy terms.

"We aim to have the French do something about this issue this year, as this is the year of their presidency.

"We are also planning to gain some cross-party support, and support from MEPs from other EU states, to obtain the best results."

Other UK civil partners living in France have spoken out about since PinkNews.co.uk's interview with Mr Soares.

Oliver Hepworth and his partner had a CP ceremony in 2005. The couple bought a property in France ten years ago, but have since discovered that their CP is not fully recognised in France.

Mr Hepworth told PinkNews.co.uk:

"Our British CP is not recognised in France at all and we have no legal rights as a couple over in France.

"We thought the solution would be to have a PACS over here but we were refused from doing this because we were already in a CP in the U.K.

"The registrar in France required the British embassy to issue a certificate de coutume to say that we are not in a legal civil partnership in the UK. Obviously we are.

"It seems that the tribunal recognises our civil partnership but not the French tax authorities or the French legal system.

"It seems really discriminating to British nationals since the French have a same sex partnership called the PACS, and they also give gay Dutch married couples full legal recognition.

"Alas British gay couples are discriminated against.

"Couples with a PACS have 0% inheritance tax whilst we are still subject to 60% inheritance tax.

"Obviously this would be a huge bill for us and would mean that we would have to sell our home to pay the tax bill.

"Even life insurance would be subject to 60% taxes and because of the laws of succession it is almost impossible to leave it to your partner.

"A French couple with a PACS living in the U.K has always been able to benefit from the UK system in the same way as married or civil partners can and have no difficulty in leaving their estate to their partners and pay 0% inheritance tax.

"They also benefit from all other legal aspects of a British CP.

"This is grossly unfair; why should British gay couples be treated so badly in France when the UK give all the same benefits to French gay couples that they do to their own nationals?

"What is also unfair is that for French nationals living in the UK who already have a CP with their British partner and who now want a PACS with their British partner, presumably to safeguard their assets in France, are allowed to do this."

[Equality Network]

COMMUNIQUE DE PRESSE, 20 mars 2009, from Alima Boumediene-Thiery, Sénatrice des Verts:

translated by google.translate:

For the debate on the law of simplification of law and relief procedures under discussion in the Senate on March 25, Senator Alima Boumediene-Thiery (Greens) has decided to submit several amendments improved PACS.

Among the various proposals made by the Senate, an amendment was tabled, together with the Ombudsman of the Republic, for the recognition of the effects of PACS in France registered abroad.

This initiative responds to a very high demand for foreigners living in France who want their union recognized and followed up in France. However, the French government requires them to "divorce" or break their pact to enable them to PACS in France. Sometimes, these foreigners are losing the benefit of many rights of the favorable regime for which they were submitted under the sway of their foreign pact (including the recognition of a right to a pension in case of death). And they must enter into a PACS with French on many points, a delay in the light of advances made by other States which have recognized such unions.

Senator, alerted by many couples in this situation complex, proposed to create a rule of private international law that would resolve these difficulties, provided without disrupting the existing regime in France on the conclusion of a PACS.

The Committee on Legislation of the Senate to give a favorable opinion on the proposal of Senator Alima Boumediene-Thiery and the rule thus established should be adopted in public session on Wednesday 24 March 2009.

This new rule will allow for many couples to enjoy in France of all the benefits of their civil union entered into abroad, particularly in regard to the benefit of a pension provided for in some countries for partners.

translated by babelfish:

For debate on the law of simplification of the right and d' lightening of the procedures under discussion to the Senate on March 25, the sénatrice Alima Boumediene-Thiery (Greens) decided to deposit several amendments carrying improvement of the PACS.

Among the various proposals formulated by the sénatrice, an amendment was deposited, in dialogue with the Mediator of the Republic, tending to the recognition of the effects in France of the recorded PACS with l' foreigner.

This initiative answers very a strong demand d' foreigners installed in France who wish to see their recognized and followed foreign union d'effects in France. However, l' French administration obliges them “to divorce”, that is to say to break their pact to be able pacser in France. Some times, these foreigners lose the benefit of many rights resulting from the favorable mode to which they were subjected under l' worsen of their foreign pact (concerning in particular the recognition d' a right to a widow survivor's pension in the event of death). And they must conclude a French PACS presenting, on many points, a delay taking into consideration projection made by the other States having recognized such unions.

The sénatrice, alerted by many couples being in this complex situation, proposed to create a legal provision international private which would make it possible to solve these difficulties, without upsetting for as much the existing mode in France relating to the d' conclusion; a PACS.

The Commission of the Laws of the Senate has to give an favorable opinion to the proposal of the sénatrice Alima Boumediene-Thiery and the rule thus laid down should be adopted in public on Wednesday March 24, 2009.

This new rule will thus make it possible many couples to be able to enjoy, in France, of all the advantages related to their concluded civil union with l' foreigner, in particular with regard to the benefit d' a widow survivor's pension envisaged in certain countries for the partners

original text:

En vue du débat sur la loi de simplification du droit et d'allègement des procédures en discussion au Sénat le 25 mars, la sénatrice Alima Boumediene-Thiery (Verts)  a décidé de déposer plusieurs amendements portant amélioration du PACS.

Parmi les différentes propositions formulées par la sénatrice, un amendement a été déposé, en concertation avec le Médiateur de la République, tendant à la reconnaissance des effets en France des PACS enregistrés à l'étranger.

Cette initiative répond à une très forte demande d'étrangers installés en France qui souhaitent voir leur union étrangère reconnue et suivie d'effets en France. Or, l'Administration française les oblige à « divorcer », soit rompre leur pacte pour pouvoir se pacser en France. Quelques fois, ces étrangers perdent le bénéfice de nombreux droits issus du régime favorable auxquels ils étaient soumis sous l'empire de leur pacte étranger (concernant notamment la reconnaissance d'un droit à une pension de réversion en cas de décès). Et ils doivent conclure un PACS français présentant, sur de nombreux points, un retard au regard des avancées faites par les autres Etats ayant reconnues de telles unions.

La sénatrice,  alertée par de nombreux couples se trouvant dans cette situation complexe,  a proposé de créer une règle de droit international privé qui permettrait de résoudre ces difficultés, sans bouleverser pour autant le régime existant en France concernant la conclusion d'un PACS.

La Commission des Lois du Sénat a donner un avis favorable à la proposition de la sénatrice Alima Boumediene-Thiery et la règle ainsi établie devrait être adoptée en séance publique le Mercredi 24 mars 2009.

Cette nouvelle règle permettra ainsi à de nombreux couples de pouvoir jouir, en France, de tous les avantages liés à leur union civile conclue à l'étranger, notamment en ce qui concerne le bénéfice d'une pension de réversion prévu dans certains pays pour les partenaires.

[Equality Network]

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY, 20 April 2009

SIMPLIFICATION OF LAW (Second Reading) - (No. 1578)

AMENDMENT No. 6, presented by Christian Vanneste

Google translate:

This amendment is to delete the object of Article 1 A of the bill as a result of amendment No. 39 rect. Mrs Boumédiene Bis-Thiery adopted in the Senate on 24 March 2009.

The operative part of the article introduced in the Senate aims to make the conditions of formation and the effects of registered partnerships, as well as the causes and effects of their dissolution, the substantive provisions of the law of the State of registration. If the development of private international law rules governing the effects in France of registered partnerships abroad (such as the civil partnership was introduced in English law by the Civil Partnership Act 2004) is indispensable, it must be d 'a more fully developed and be subject to democratic debate.

As to its form, the provision passed in the Senate raises questions. It seems that the text on the simplification of the law is a legal basis inappropriate and unsuitable for the introduction of an article of this magnitude. Article 1 A does not simplify the law, but to raise doubts about the conditions of its implementation. The specificity of private international law would justify the intervention of a project or a proposed law on the subject.

On the substance, such a provision is both incomplete and dangerous.

It is incomplete in that it draws no distinction between the type of effects that partnerships registered abroad are likely to produce in France (property, which should be recognized automatically, and personal effects, which should be a recognition framed by the imperatives of international public order french). Furthermore, the submission, with no details or reservations, training conditions and effects to the registration law seems excessive. Indeed, some of the effects of unions are involved in legal categories that are already subject to a rule of conflict (eg, inheritance). The relationship between the law applicable to these legal categories and the law of the State of registration should be more nuanced.

It is dangerous in that it requires no connection between the partners and the authority shall register and, therefore, encourages fraud. That is to offer two French, for example, the range of all laws in the world who know the registered partnership, including those which attach effects wider than the french PACS (and close to the marriage). The Civil Partnership Act 2004, for example, opens the right to adoption partners. Once registered abroad, these effects would have their unions recognized in France, although some of these effects is subject to a prohibition by the French law (the example of the adoption by homosexual couples).

original text:

Le présent amendement a pour l’objet de supprimer l’article 1er A de la proposition de loi tel qu’il résulte de l’amendement n° 39 rect. Bis de Mme Boumédiene-Thiery adopté au Sénat le 24 mars 2009.

Le dispositif de l’article introduit au Sénat a pour finalité de soumettre les conditions de formation et les effets des partenariats enregistrés, ainsi que les causes et les effets de leur dissolution, aux dispositions matérielles de la loi de l’État d’enregistrement. Si l’élaboration des règles de droit international privé régissant les effets en France des partenariats enregistrés à l’étranger (tels que le civil partnership introduit en droit anglais par le Civil Partnership Act de 2004) est indispensable, elle doit faire l’objet d’une réflexion plus élaborée et être pleinement soumise au débat démocratique.

Quant à sa forme, la disposition votée au Sénat suscite des interrogations. Il semble que le texte sur la simplification du droit soit une base juridique inappropriée et inadaptée pour l’introduction d’un article de telle ampleur. L’article 1er A ne simplifie nullement le droit, mais bien au contraire suscite des doutes quant aux conditions de sa mise en œuvre. La spécificité du droit international privé justifierait l’intervention d’un projet ou d’une proposition de loi sur le sujet.

Quand au fond, une telle disposition est à la fois incomplète et dangereuse.

Elle est incomplète en ce qu’elle n’opère aucune distinction selon le type d’effets que les partenariats enregistrés à l’étranger seraient susceptibles de produire en France (effets patrimoniaux, qui devraient être reconnus de plein droit, et effets personnels, qui devraient faire l’objet d’une reconnaissance encadrée par les impératifs de l’ordre public international français). Par ailleurs, la soumission, sans aucune précision ou réserve, des conditions de formation et des effets à la loi d’enregistrement paraît excessive. En effet, certains effets des unions concernées s’inscrivent dans des catégories juridiques qui font déjà l’objet d’une règle de conflit (par exemple, les successions). Les rapports entre la loi applicable à ces catégories juridiques et la loi de l’État d’enregistrement devraient être davantage nuancés.

Elle est dangereuse en ce qu’elle n’exige aucun lien de rattachement entre les partenaires et l’autorité qui procède à l’enregistrement et, dès lors, favorise la fraude. Cela revient à offrir à deux Français, par exemple, l’éventail de toutes les lois du monde qui connaissent le partenariat enregistré, y compris celles qui y attachent des effets plus étendus que le PACS français (et proches du mariage). Le Civil Partnership Act de 2004, par exemple, ouvre le droit d’adoption aux partenaires. Une fois enregistrés à l’étranger, ces unions verraient leurs effets reconnus en France, même si certains de ces effets font l’objet d’une prohibition par la loi française (l’exemple de l’adoption par les couples homosexuels).

[Equality Network]

Forwarded from a network supporter in France:

Article 1 - allows for the recognition in France of foreign civil partners
(Article 515-7-1 of the civil code):

Despite this now being law, France still refuses to give British civil partners the same tax rights as French same sex couples. One notable difference is that France still imposes a 60% inheritance tax rate on surviving partners. Unlike French couples in a PACS or Dutch gay married couples who are fully exempt from inheritance tax. When I asked the French tax office whether we would now be exempt from inheritance tax they replied as follows:

Nature of request: IR income
Purpose of request: Legal Information note:
CARD-7SF9SS Treaty by: Inspector main, large staff

Hello Sir / Madam

Hello,

Under the current tax law, there is nothing to respond
favorably to your request.

Accordingly, I invite you to renew your question after the center
taxes which you live or on the site of Tax Administration "impots.gouv.fr "

Regards

Hello,

Thank you for your mail and your interest in our association COMIN G-LGBT staff of the Ministries of Budget and Economy and Collective Homoboulot

You condemn the difference in tax treatment between partners in a PACS and partners of British civil partnership, particularly with regard to succession, and this even though France evokes foreign partnerships in the new Article 515-7-1 of the Civil Code.

This article of law was only drafted in to deal with civil matters, not tax, how France should consider the birth and the end of partnerships abroad: the foreign state which created the partnership that concludes this partnership, and that is what this article says.

As to the difference in tax treatment in the matter of succession between the different partnerships, particularly in Europe, we can only regret, but should be reciprocal so that all partners have equal rights. But I'm not sure that partners English, Spanish and Dutch have all married no right of succession, as is the case for french PACS partners (and only under certain conditions).
Your application, if I understand it, to change tax law to french equality between European civilians is legitimate. However, should all countries with a civil partnership have a tax law which opens the same rights, this is not the case.
The non-discrimination clause is therefore not applicable, since there is discrimination, it is necessary that the charge are the same, what remains to be demonstrated.
Hoping to have answered your questions, I remain at your disposal if necessary.

Original text:

« Nature de la demande : IR revenus

Objet de la demande : Demande d'information juridique Référence :
CARD-7SF9SS Traité par : Inspecteur principal, grande equipe

Bonjour Madame / Monsieur

Bonjour,

En l'état actuel de la législation fiscale, rien ne permet de répondre
favorablement à votre demande.

En conséquence,  je vous invite à renouveler votre question après du centre
des impôts dont vous dépendez  ou sur le site de l'administration fiscale "
impots.gouv.fr"

Cordialement"

Bonjour,

Merci pour votre mail et l'intérêt que vous portez à notre association COMIN-G des personnels LGBT des ministères du Budget et de l'Économie et au Collectif Homoboulot

Vous dénoncez la différence de traitement fiscal entre les  partenaires d'un PACS et les partenaires du partenariat civil britannique, notamment en matière de succession, et ce, alors même que la France évoque les partenariats étrangers dans le nouvel article 515-7-1 du code civil.
Cet article de loi a seulement été rédigé pour régler en matière civile, et non fiscale, la façon dont la France doit considérer la naissance et la fin des partenariats conclus à l'étranger: c'est l'État étranger qui crée le partenariat qui met fin à ce partenariat, et c'est tout ce que dit cet article.

Quant à la différence de traitement fiscal en matière de succession entre les différents partenariats, notamment européens, on ne peut que la regretter, mais il faudrait une réciprocité pour que les partenaires européens aient tous les mêmes droits. Or, je ne suis pas sûr que les partenaires anglais, espagnols et les mariés hollandais aient tous une absence de droit de succession, comme c'est le cas pour les partenaires du PACS français (et seulement sous certaines conditions).
Votre demande, si je la comprends bien, de faire évoluer le droit fiscal français vers une égalité entre partenaires civils européens, est légitime. Cependant, il faudrait que l'ensemble des pays avec un partenariat civil aient une législation fiscale qui ouvre les mêmes droits, et ce n'est pas le cas.
La clause de non discrimination ne trouve donc pas à s'appliquer puisque, pour qu'il y ait discrimination, il faudrait que les droits fiscaux soient les mêmes, ce qui reste à démontrer.
En espérant avoir répondu à vos interrogations, je reste à votre disposition si besoin.