French Forced Heirship Returns Through the Back Door
Many Americans living in France take comfort in the European Succession Regulation, which generally allows them to elect the law of their nationality to govern their estate. For a U.S. citizen, this often means that the succession can be governed by the law of a U.S. state rather than French inheritance law.
Many assume that this election completely eliminates French forced-heirship rules. Recent developments suggest the situation may be more complicated.
Under Article 913 of the French Civil Code, children may have a right to a compensatory claim against assets located in France when the foreign law governing the succession provides no mechanism protecting children’s inheritance rights.
This provision attracted significant attention following complaints filed with the European Commission, arguing that France’s approach was inconsistent with the European Succession Regulation. On June 4, 2026, the European Commission issued a pre-closure letter indicating its intention to close those complaints.
Importantly, the Commission did not reject the French rule. Instead, it appeared willing to accept France’s explanation that Article 913 operates only as a residual safeguard where the foreign law provides no meaningful protection for children.
That distinction may have significant consequences for Americans.
France pointed to English law as an example of a system that may satisfy this requirement. Although English law permits broad testamentary freedom, the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 allows certain family members, including children in some circumstances, to petition a court for financial provision from an estate. France argued that such mechanisms may constitute sufficient protection, reducing the need for Article 913 to apply.
The United States presents a very different picture.
There is no single American law of succession. Under the European Succession Regulation, the applicable law is generally the law of the relevant state. In most U.S. states, freedom of testation remains the governing principle. Adult children can generally be disinherited entirely, with no guaranteed inheritance rights and no equivalent mechanism allowing them to seek a compulsory share of the estate.
As a result, the reasoning advanced by France may actually strengthen the case for applying Article 913 to many American estates.
Consider the following example.
An American citizen has lived in France for many years. He has two adult children who live in the United States. His estate consists of:
• A €2 million apartment in Nice;
• €500,000 held in French bank accounts;
• A $5 million investment portfolio held with a U.S. custodian.
His will elects the law of his home state in the United States and leaves his entire estate to his second spouse.
Under the laws of many U.S. states, the children may receive nothing.
Many Americans would assume that the analysis ends there. After all, the deceased validly elected U.S. law.
Article 913 suggests otherwise.
If the applicable U.S. state law provides no mechanism protecting children’s inheritance rights, the children may argue that they are entitled to a compensatory recovery from French assets. Had French law applied directly, two children would generally have been entitled collectively to a reserved share representing two-thirds of the estate.
The critical limitation is that Article 913 does not create a claim against the entire worldwide estate. The statute specifically refers to assets situated in France at the date of death. In our example, that would include the apartment in Nice and the French bank accounts. The French courts cannot simply seize the U.S. brokerage account through this mechanism.
Even so, for Americans who have accumulated substantial assets in France, the practical consequences can be significant.
Ironically, the European Commission’s recent position may reinforce this conclusion. By accepting France’s argument that Article 913 applies only where foreign law lacks a protective mechanism for children, the Commission may have highlighted a fundamental difference between English law and the laws of many American states. What may exempt certain British estates from the French compensatory levy could leave many American estates exposed to it.
The lesson for Americans living in France is straightforward.
Electing U.S. law remains an important estate-planning tool. It may determine the overall administration of the succession and preserve a high degree of testamentary freedom. Yet the election of U.S. law may not, by itself, eliminate the possibility that French children’s rights will reappear through Article 913 when French assets are involved.
For families with French real estate, French financial accounts, second marriages, blended families, or unequal inheritance plans among children, estate planning increasingly requires coordination between advisers.
The question is no longer simply whether an American can choose U.S. law.
The more important question may be whether the chosen U.S. law provides enough protection for children to prevent France from reintroducing forced-heirship principles through Article 913.