TRACFIN déclarant and correspondant: French designation

In France, the people who talk to TRACFIN are named in advance: a déclarant under Article R. 561-23 of the Code monétaire et financier and a correspondant under Article R. 561-24, both notified to TRACFIN and to the ACPR. A third person, the responsable de la mise en œuvre du dispositif LCB-FT, is designated under Article L. 561-32 and given missions by the arrêté of 6 January 2021. Payment and e-money institutions passporting into France meet a fourth role, the représentant permanent, once their agent or distributor network crosses set thresholds. This piece sets out who each person is, how designation works and what applies to EEA branches and agent networks.

1. The texts

The designation rules sit in the regulatory part of the Code monétaire et financier (CMF), in a sub-section headed Désignation d’un déclarant et d’un correspondant:

• Article R. 561-23 — the déclarant, the person authorised to file suspicion reports under Article L. 561-15.
• Article R. 561-24 — the correspondant, the person who answers requests from TRACFIN and from the supervisor.
• Article R. 561-27 — déclarants and correspondants of the same firm share what TRACFIN tells them.
• Article R. 561-28 — the group derogation: one joint designation for several group entities.
• Article R. 561-38-2 — AML tasks may be outsourced, except the reporting duty under L. 561-15.

Around them sit Article L. 561-32 (the AML/CFT responsable), the arrêté of 6 January 2021 on the AML/CFT framework and internal control (Journal officiel, 16 January 2021) and, for EEA firms, Article L. 561-3 VI with Article D. 561-3-1 (the représentant permanent). The joint ACPR–TRACFIN guidelines on vigilance and reporting, updated to 22 January 2025, explain the supervisors’ reading; they do not bind.

2. The déclarant: Article R. 561-23

Under R. 561-23 I, the persons at 1° to 7° quater of Article L. 561-2 — including payment institutions (1° bis) and e-money institutions (1° ter) — give TRACFIN and their supervisor the identity of the managers or employees authorised to file suspicion reports.

R. 561-23 II requires any change concerning those persons to be notified without delay to TRACFIN and to the supervisor. R. 561-23 III is the emergency valve: in exceptional cases, notably urgency, any manager or employee may report directly to TRACFIN, and the authorised person confirms the report as soon as possible. Per the guidelines, that person registers on ERMES and files even before validation.

The déclarant’s identity is part of the report itself: Article R. 561-31 III 2° makes the details of the déclarant designated under R. 561-23 I mandatory content, and R. 561-31 V gives TRACFIN a one-month regularisation route for reports that fall short.

3. The correspondant: Article R. 561-24

The correspondant answers requests from TRACFIN and the supervisor and passes their general guidance to the staff concerned. Identity, and any change, goes to both without delay.

R. 561-24 adds a duty the déclarant article does not have: the firm must make sure the correspondant function runs with the continuity needed to answer TRACFIN within the deadlines it sets. That is a staffing rule: TRACFIN’s right of communication (L. 561-25) does not wait for someone’s leave to end.

Under R. 561-27, déclarants and correspondants of the same firm share what TRACFIN tells them. In ERMES, the déclarant carries legal responsibility for the report and is correspondant by default; a correspondant can draft a report but only a déclarant signs and sends it. One person may hold both roles.

4. Where the roles sit, and what cannot be outsourced

Three location and outsourcing rules shape the build:

• In France. The ACPR–TRACFIN guidelines state that the déclarant and correspondant carry out their functions in France, and TRACFIN’s own ERMES guidance says the déclarant must reside in France. The guidelines cite a 2017 ACPR Sanctions Committee decision (procedure no. 2016-10) holding that designating as déclarant an employee of an entity in Morocco, even temporarily, was itself a breach.
• Not to an external provider. R. 561-38-2 allows AML outsourcing but excludes the L. 561-15 reporting obligations. The guidelines accept intra-group performance, with the parent’s agreement, by people working in France.
• Group designation. Under R. 561-28, entities in one L. 561-33 group may agree, with their parent, on a joint designation. The person must work in France; the group notifies TRACFIN and each supervisor.

5. Designating in practice: the ERMES registration

Notification runs through ERMES, TRACFIN’s reporting platform. Registration is done person by person through the Demande d’inscription menu. TRACFIN’s June 2025 focus sheet on access lists what it asks for:

• the reporting entity’s SIRET (or SIREN), name, address, profession and, if already registered, its TRACFIN number;
• the user’s own contact details and the choice of role — déclarant or correspondant;
• the formulaire de désignation, signed by a legal representative named on the Kbis extract, stating the legal representative’s name and the role given;
• supporting documents: the entity’s Kbis extract (and the Kbis of a corporate legal representative where there is one) or, without a SIREN, the INSEE record and a delegation of signature;
• the authentication mode — simple (login and password) for occasional use, or strong, with an RGS certificate, which is mandatory for correspondants.

TRACFIN publishes two designation forms, one for financial and non-financial professions and one for public declarants. A report entered before validation only counts once TRACFIN validates the registration, and the validation notice is the only evidence TRACFIN issues — file it. An account unused for two years is deactivated; ask TRACFIN to reactivate it rather than registering again.

ERMES covers TRACFIN only. R. 561-23 and R. 561-24 also require notification to the ACPR, so treat that as a separate step with its own record.

6. The responsable LCB-FT: Article L. 561-32 and the arrêté of 6 January 2021

The déclarant reports; the responsable owns the framework. Article L. 561-32 I requires each firm, taking its size and activity into account, to designate a person in a senior position with sufficient knowledge of its money-laundering and terrorist-financing risk exposure as responsible for implementing the AML/CFT framework, and where relevant a similar person at group level.

Article 3 of the arrêté of 6 January 2021 sets the missions. The responsable defines and oversees the framework; validates the risk classification and procedures, including escalation; checks foreign subsidiaries and branches have local arrangements; receives reports of incidents and deficiencies, which are passed on to the déclarant and correspondant; follows up corrective measures; and keeps the directors and supervisory body informed. Where size, activity or risk leave no one else, the director holds the role.

Article 1 4° defines the procédure d’escalade: it must give the responsable, the R. 561-23 and R. 561-24 déclarants and correspondants, and internal control staff fast, effective access to information. Article 18 bars giving permanent AML control to the responsable unless size or complexity justify it.

The stakes are personal. Under Article L. 561-36-1, where direct and personal responsibility is established against the L. 561-32 responsable, the ACPR Sanctions Committee may ban that person from management functions at obliged entities for up to five years.

7. The four roles side by side

8. EEA branches and agent networks

Article L. 561-2 draws the line. French branches of EEA payment institutions (1° bis) and e-money institutions (1° ter) are obliged entities in their own right, so the branch designates its own déclarant and correspondant like any French firm.

An EEA credit, payment or e-money institution operating in France through agents or e-money distributors, without a branch, falls under 1° quater, along with crypto-asset service providers in the same position. For those firms Article D. 561-3-1 requires a représentant permanent when any one of four conditions is met:

1. ten or more agents or distributors in France;
2. more than EUR 3 million of e-money in circulation and redeemed, or of payment transactions executed for services provided in France, in the previous financial year — or expected in the current one;
3. money remittance (L. 314-1 II 6°) provided in France;
4. distribution in France of e-money on a physical medium that can be loaded other than by a payment from a person identified and verified under R. 561-5 and R. 561-5-1.

This is France’s form of the AML central contact point covered by Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/1108. The représentant permanent resides in France and is specially designated for the role. Their identity goes without delay to the ACPR and to TRACFIN, and a legal-person representative names a responsible individual. Under L. 561-3 VI B they file suspicion reports and systematic communications and answer TRACFIN, the ACPR, the courts and judicial police. The ACPR Secretary General may require an appointment below the thresholds if the firm has not supplied the data to test them or ML/TF risk looks high.

9. Worked case: the only déclarant resigns

Facts: a French e-money institution has one registered déclarant, who is also its correspondant. She resigns with a one-month notice period.

What the rule says: R. 561-23 II and R. 561-24 require the change to be notified to TRACFIN and the ACPR without delay, and R. 561-24 requires continuity of the correspondant function. Registration for a successor needs a designation form signed by a legal representative on the Kbis.

What the compliance officer does: gets the successor’s form signed in week one, registers them on ERMES with strong authentication, keeps the validation notice, notifies the ACPR, and closes the leaver’s access on her last day.

Outcome: no reporting gap, and a dated record of each notification.

10. Worked case: a group wants one déclarant

Facts: a group holds a French payment institution and a French e-money institution and wants one person, employed by the parent in another EU country, to act as déclarant for both.

What the rule says: R. 561-28 allows a joint group designation with the parent’s agreement, but the person must work in France, and the group notifies TRACFIN and each supervisor. The Sanctions Committee has treated a déclarant based outside France as a breach in itself.

What the compliance officer does: keeps the joint designation but places the déclarant in France and records the parent’s agreement.

Outcome: one déclarant for two entities, on a basis the supervisor accepts.

11. Worked case: an EEA EMI grows its distributor network

Facts: an e-money institution licensed in another member state distributes in France through seven distributors, with no French branch. A new retail deal would take it to twelve.

What the rule says: under D. 561-3-1 I 1°, ten or more agents or distributors in France triggers a représentant permanent resident in France, whose identity goes to the ACPR and TRACFIN without delay.

What the compliance officer does: appoints the représentant before the tenth distributor goes live, registers them on ERMES, notifies the ACPR, and tests the EUR 3 million threshold yearly.

Outcome: compliant on day one of the deal, not after a supervisory request.

FAQ

What to do, today

• Compliance: list every déclarant and correspondant; check each has a signed designation form, a TRACFIN validation notice and a dated ACPR notification on file.
• HR and compliance: add déclarant and correspondant departures to the leaver process so that notifications go out without delay.
• Responsable LCB-FT: check the escalation procedure gives déclarants and correspondants fast access to the information they need, as Article 1 4° of the arrêté requires.
• EEA firms with French agents or distributors: test the four D. 561-3-1 triggers each year and record the result, and test the PSD2 central contact point criteria separately.

Related: ERMES and the déclaration de soupçon · TRACFIN — suspicious activity in France · The AML representative across the EU · AML officer roles compared across the EU