Fintech 2026

FRANCE Law and Practice Contributed by: Sylvain Clavé and Germain Chaux, Clavé Avocat

2.3 Compensation Models Compensation models used by French fintechs are diverse, ranging from transaction-based fees and sub - scriptions to performance-based commissions. While these models are generally flexible, they are governed by strict transparency mandates to protect retail and professional clients. Banks and Neobanks For banks and neobanks, compensation is mostly based on monthly subscriptions and per-transaction fees. A critical regulatory cap remains for payment incident fees (limited to EUR25 per month for financial - ly vulnerable clients). Furthermore, several neobanks have popularised cashback systems; legally, these often operate as commercial rebates or affiliate com - missions from merchant partners. Under French con - sumer law, any fees charged specifically for a “cash - back” service (ie, cash withdrawal at a merchant) must be disclosed prior to completion of the transaction. Investment Firms and Brokerage (PFOF Prohibition) A major shift has occurred in 2026 with the EU-wide ban on Payment for Order Flow (PFOF) under the MiFIR review. Reinforcing the “best execution” prin - ciple, French investment firms are now strictly pro - hibited from receiving fees or commissions from third parties for routing client orders to specific market makers. CIFs and Investment Firms These remain subject to the MiFID II inducement regime, which requires them to disclose any benefits received from third parties, and to demonstrate that such benefits enhance the quality of the service pro - vided to the client. CASPs Since the entry into application of MiCAR, these must comply with harmonised disclosure rules and are required to publish their fee structure on their web - site (transaction fees, custody costs, etc). The MiFID II inducements framework served as a foundation for MiCAR, which imposes similar obligations on CASPs.

Neobanks and Payment Apps These generally operate under payment services pro - viders (PSPs), credit institutions or electronic money institutions (EMIs) licences. Notably, account aggre - gators and payment initiation tools are specifically regulated as account information service providers (AISPs) or payment initiation service providers (PISPs) under the PSD2 framework. Personal Finance and Wealth Management Apps Depending on the services provided, these are gener - ally regulated as AISPs, financial investment advisers ( Conseillers en investissements financiers – CIFs) or investment services providers ( Prestataires de servic- es d’investissement – PSIs), including robo-advisers. Insurtechs and robo-advisers that include life insur - ance products or brokerage features must also be reg - istered as insurance intermediaries (IAS) with ORIAS, the French register of banking, finance and insurance intermediaries. Crowdfunding and Crowdlending Platforms These are regulated as crowdfunding services provid - ers, under the Regulation on European Crowdfund - ing Service Providers (ECSP). Residual activities not covered by the EU regulation – such as certain types of donations ( cagnottes ) or specific intermediaries in crowdfinancing (IFP) for projects outside the ECSP’s scope – remain subject to French law. Digital Asset Players Where applicable, these are subject to the PACTE law and the digital asset services providers (DASPs) regime, until 30 June 2026. Following the Markets in Crypto-assets Regulation’s (MiCAR) full application in 2025: • new players must be authorised as crypto-assets services providers (CASPs); and • existing DASPs can continue operating while final - ising their transition to full CASP status. Consequently, from 1 July 2026, all crypto-asset com - panies must have obtained a CASP licence from the Financial Markets Authority ( Autorité des Marchés Financiers – AMF) to operate in France and benefit from the European passport.

288 CHAMBERS.COM