Neutrality and equal treatment: the clause France's anti-fraud law now requires in your internal regulations

A CFA that funds its apprenticeship training through OPCOs, and an organization that lives off CPF or regional public contracts: both, under the Labor Code, are soliciting “public funds.” Since June 27, 2026, that situation triggers an obligation that already existed on paper but that few organizations had actually built into their internal regulations — and that can now become costly in an audit. Law n° 2026-534 of June 25, 2026 on combating social and fiscal fraud, already known for tightening the training activity declaration number (NDA) and the CPF repayment rules, turns what had largely been a symbolic obligation into a concrete financial risk.

What article L6352-4 of the Labor Code actually says

Internal regulations are mandatory for every training organization from the start of its activity, under article L6352-3. But as soon as an organization solicits funds from the financers listed in article L6316-1 — OPCOs, France Travail, the State, regional councils, the Caisse des dépôts et consignations among others — an additional article of the Labor Code applies: L6352-4.

This provision imposes three principles, which must appear explicitly in the internal regulations:

• guaranteeing equal treatment of all trainees and apprentices, regardless of their background;
• ensuring respect for each person’s freedom of expression and conscience throughout the training;
• safeguarding the neutrality of the teaching delivered, both in content and in the statements made by trainers and instructors.

These principles are not specific to CFAs, nor tied to any particular religion: they cover any unjustified differential treatment between beneficiaries, any proselytizing in course content, and any infringement on trainees’ freedom of thought. In practice, many organizations made do with a generic non-discrimination clause lifted from an online template, without picking up the three precise notions required by L6352-4.

What actually changes with the June 25, 2026 law

Article 71 of law n° 2026-534 does not rewrite the substance of the neutrality and equal treatment obligation: it strengthens its sanction, by amending article L6362-3 of the Labor Code. Before this reform, that article only allowed a training action to be reclassified as “deemed unexecuted” — triggering mandatory repayment of funds to the funder — when the action had pursued a purpose other than the legal aims of professional training listed in articles L6313-1 to L6313-8.

Since June 27, 2026, a breach of the obligations under article L6352-4 can now be treated under the same logic. In practice, an audit that reveals unequal treatment between trainees, pressure placed on an apprentice’s freedom of conscience, or a lack of neutrality in the teaching delivered can result in the action concerned being deemed unexecuted — even if, substantively, the pedagogical content otherwise matched the declared program. An obligation that had remained largely declarative therefore becomes enforceable with a direct financial consequence: repayment of the sums received for the action in question, or, absent repayment within the given deadline, formal collection through the French Treasury.

Who is affected: the article L6316-1 filter on funders

The full reach of this reform hinges on a technical point: L6352-4 only applies to organizations that solicit funds from the funders listed in article L6316-1. That list covers most of the pooled funding for professional training in France:

• skills operators (OPCOs);
• France Travail;
• the State and regional councils;
• the Caisse des dépôts et consignations (and therefore, indirectly, CPF via EDOF);
• the commission mentioned in article L6323-17-6 and the institution mentioned in article L5214-1 (Agefiph).

In short, as soon as an organization touches apprenticeship, CPF, OPCO-funded schemes, or a regional public contract, it falls within the scope of L6352-4. Only an organization funded entirely through intra-company training or direct self-funding by individuals, never drawing on these channels, escapes this specific obligation — though it remains bound, like any organization, by the general rules on internal regulations set out in article L6352-3.

Bringing your internal regulations into compliance: the method

1. Reread your current internal regulations and check whether the three notions — equal treatment, freedom of expression and conscience, neutrality of teaching — appear explicitly. A generic “non-discrimination” clause is not enough: an auditor or control agent looks for these precise terms.
2. Draft a dedicated article, separate from the disciplinary procedure, that restates each of the three principles and specifies that they apply to everyone acting on the organization’s behalf: salaried trainers, subcontractors, and administrative staff.
3. Align this clause with your violence and discrimination prevention system, already required under indicator 12 of the Qualiopi framework: the same internal reporting channel can cover both obligations, provided it is clearly referenced in both contexts.
4. Distribute the updated version to trainees and apprentices already mid-training, not just new entrants, with dated proof of delivery or posting.
5. Train your instructors — including subcontractors — on what the neutrality of teaching actually means in practice, to avoid a single remark by an external trainer exposing the whole organization to a reclassification of the action.

Why equal treatment is not just a formality

The lawmaker’s choice to financially sanction breaches of equal treatment did not come out of nowhere. A landmark study led by sociologist Prisca Kergoat and coordinated by Emmanuel Sulzer for Injep and Céreq, «Mesure et analyse des discriminations d’accès à l’apprentissage» (Measuring and analyzing discrimination in access to apprenticeship), found that the insertion outcomes often cited in favor of apprenticeship are partly explained by the exclusion, at the entry point, of candidates deemed less “profitable” to train — including young women in certain fields, and young people of Maghrebi, Turkish, or Sub-Saharan African immigrant background. This research, conducted between 2014 and 2017, sheds light on why lawmakers no longer settled for a mere obligation of principle: without a financial lever, equal treatment remains an intention with little real effect on how beneficiaries are selected and supported.

Common mistakes to avoid

• Settling for a generic non-discrimination clause copied from an online template, without restating the exact terms of article L6352-4.
• Forgetting to distribute the updated internal regulations to trainees already mid-training.
• Training only salaried trainers, leaving subcontractors and one-off instructors outside the awareness effort.
• Confusing this obligation with the broader violence and harassment prevention duty under indicator 12: the two complement each other but do not substitute for one another.
• Assuming this obligation only applies to CFAs: it applies to any organization soliciting the funders listed in article L6316-1, whether for continuing training or apprenticeship.

Take action

Updating your internal regulations with these three precise clauses takes half an hour, but it removes a very real risk of fund repayment that has existed since June 27, 2026. The Complete Kit Certif (€297, 14-day guarantee, documents in French) includes an internal regulations template to adapt to this reform, along with the evidence tables for the 32 indicators of the current framework. To secure your entire activity declaration and mandatory documents from day one, the ebook Create your training organization in 30 days (€67) and the Pack complet (€347) guide you step by step.