Why recurring beats spot procurement
A family office that spot-procures an accredited fiscal representative every time a property changes hands pays for the same scoping work over and over. The firm learns the client profile, the holding structure, and the wire preferences on file one, then repeats the exercise on file three because the engagement has lapsed. A standing relationship preserves that institutional memory. More importantly, it keeps the firm honest on fees because the next file is visible on the horizon. The gain is not a dramatic discount; it is a steady reduction of friction and a predictable audit-handling path across the whole property book.
Framework agreement, file-level mandates
The structure I have seen work is a two-layer arrangement. The top layer is a framework agreement between the family office and the accredited firm, covering pricing schedule, service levels, data handling, conflict protocols, and the exit terms if either side wants to step away. The framework does not substitute for the statutory mandate. Each disposal still triggers its own 244 bis A mandate, signed by the owning entity, because the firm guarantees the tax position on that entity specifically. The framework sets the terms; the mandate carries the legal weight. Keep the two documents in separate files, because an audit focuses on the mandate and the calculation, not on the commercial umbrella.
Pricing, volume and guarantor liability
A firm carries the same guarantor risk on file ten as on file one. That fact caps the volume discount available. Fifteen to twenty-five percent against the retail grid is the band I see once a family office reaches four or five files a year, and firms that offer more usually recoup it elsewhere, either on hidden fees or on stingy audit handling. Structure pricing as a capped schedule by sale price band, not as a flat percentage; caps reward larger deals without feeling punitive on small ones. Ask the firm to invoice per file, even when they discount, so that each engagement has a clean paper trail on audit.
Governance: primary firm, reserve firm, IFI overlay
Good governance on the family-office side requires a second relationship. The primary firm handles the flow. The reserve firm handles conflicts, holidays, and the rare event of an accreditation suspension. One file a year with the reserve firm is enough to keep the relationship live and to benchmark the primary. Layer the IFI correspondence representative as a separate engagement, even if both services sit under the same firm. The IFI is an annual filing; the 244 bis A mandate is event-driven. Mixing the two in one engagement letter muddies the audit trail and makes fee negotiations harder later.
Worked example
A single-family office based in Geneva looks after a property book that contains four French assets across two family branches, with an average of one and a half disposals per year. In 2026, the family office consolidates representation under one accredited firm with a framework agreement that caps fees at €12,000 per file up to €3 million sale price, with a service level of 48-hour file response and 10-working-day audit response. A reserve firm handles one low-value disposal annually to keep the relationship live. Across a three-year window, the office estimates €26,000 saved on fees against the prior spot procurement and, more importantly, two audit letters handled within ten days each, without family-office staff time being consumed. The IFI engagement sits under a separate letter with the same firm, paid as a flat annual retainer.
Pitfall to avoid
The pitfall is consolidating under a single firm without a reserve in place. The framework runs smoothly for two years, then a family branch decides to sell a property that the firm happens to have co-represented on the buyer side years earlier. The conflict surfaces four weeks before the compromis and the family office has to onboard a new firm under time pressure, paying retail fees and losing the institutional memory of the file. A standing reserve firm, used once a year, removes that scenario at almost no cost.
Pro tip
Agree a written protocol with the primary firm on what happens to the dossier if the framework ends. The protocol should cover the transfer of acquisition bundles, works invoices, and the firm working notes to the successor firm within a named number of days, at no extra fee. Firms that accept that clause without friction tend to be the ones you want to keep. Firms that push back are signalling lock-in risk, and lock-in risk is the quiet cost that outlasts any headline discount.
Key takeaways
- Framework agreement at the office level, statutory mandate at the file level.
- Volume discounts top out around 15 to 25 percent; guarantor liability caps the rest.
- Keep a standing reserve firm; one file a year is enough to benchmark.
- Keep IFI and 244 bis A engagements separate for audit clarity.
- Negotiate a written dossier-transfer protocol before you need it.
Frequently asked questions
Can one mandate cover several family branches or structures?
Not cleanly. Each owning entity signs its own mandate because the accredited firm guarantees the tax position on that entity specifically. A framework agreement at family-office level keeps terms consistent while each file has its own signed mandate.
What is a reasonable volume discount on recurring files?
Fifteen to twenty-five percent against the retail grid is normal once the flow reaches four or five files a year. Beyond that, marginal discounts get smaller because the firm still carries the same guarantor liability per file.
Should the family office keep a second accredited firm in reserve?
Yes, always. A second firm protects against conflicts of interest, holidays, and the rare event of an accreditation being suspended. A one-file-a-year test with the reserve firm keeps the relationship live.
How do we handle IFI wealth tax alongside the representative mandate?
The IFI uses a correspondence representative, not a fiscal representative in the 244 bis A sense. Many accredited firms offer both services; if so, consolidate them under one relationship but keep the engagement letters separate for audit clarity.