Every answer and its explanation appears here once you have finished the path. Each one then links to the matching glossary entry, where the concept is set out in full with its worked example.
1. The first difficulty is knowing what is counted. Why does the same contract give percentages differing by ten points?
Because the national share is measured on VALUE, and the value of an industrial contract splits between equipment, engineering, erection, services and sometimes financing: depending on whether engineering done at head office, training, first-years maintenance or margin are included, very different figures result
The first mistake is presenting a figure computed on IN-HOUSE INTUITION rather than on the agency's written rules, which say which of these elements count. It is the heaviest point in the worked case: including margin and head office basic engineering is not obvious, and depending on the answer the 68 percent announced may be worth ten less, in which case the contract was never eligible and the file was processed on that figure. The nomenclature and exchange rate answers name adjacent subjects bearing on ORIGIN and on conversion, not on the perimeter of value.
Glossary entry · souscription2. An imported component is assembled and tested in a domestic plant. What is its origin?
That of the country where it underwent its last SUBSTANTIAL TRANSFORMATION, a notion with its own tests: significant assembly can make it national, mere repackaging does not
Many contracts that look insufficient on a first calculation become eligible when this question is asked properly, and THE REVERSE IS ALSO TRUE, which is more dangerous: a comfortable figure can rest on assemblies an origin review would flip. In the worked case the question favors the contractor, assembly and testing in France possibly amounting to substantial transformation, but it is documented WHILE THE ASSEMBLY ROUTINGS STILL EXIST. The country of shipment answer is the commonest intuition and matches no rule of origin.
Glossary entry · declaration-de-risque3. Is a contractor with forty percent of value from three third countries outside the scope?
It is IF NOBODY ASKED THE QUESTION, which is not the same thing: some agencies accept content from neighboring or partner states as assimilated, under conditions and sometimes within a stated limit, others tolerate a foreign share above the threshold for components unobtainable domestically, which is requested and documented
Cumulation mechanisms widen the calculation and exporters often ignore them, which causes viable files to be abandoned. The wording matters: being outside the scope and not having asked the question are two different situations, and only the second can be repaired. The answer exempting services invents a distinction where the measure bears precisely on all the value, engineering and erection included. These requests are decided BEFORE processing, never during, like the three routes that remain when the share is genuinely insufficient.
Glossary entry · assurance-credit-export4. The module says the real loss mechanism is organizational rather than legal. What does that mean, and what protects?
That the share falls SILENTLY, each purchasing decision being taken by a department with no reason to know a guarantee depends on it and none of them reaching finance; what protects is a control point attached to purchasing decisions, a recomputation threshold, a box in subcontractor approval, a table kept by whoever FOLLOWS the contract and not by whoever built the file
A FOLLOW-UP clause beats a warranty clause, and it is the same lesson as forfeiture: what holds is not vigilance but mechanism, for a cost trivial against what it protects. The answer shifting the burden to the broker names a real actor who never sees a purchasing department's orders. The one exhausting the obligation with an initial declaration describes exactly the belief that produces these losses, since verification happens at claim time and bears on the contract as PERFORMED.
Glossary entry · bonne-foi5. The share is genuinely insufficient. What routes remain, and when are they decided?
Three: recut the contract by taking foreign supplies out of the guaranteed perimeter so they are contracted separately, which mechanically raises the share of the rest; approach an agency of one of the third countries concerned, or a joint guarantee between two agencies; or the private market, which has no such bound and charges for it. All are decided BEFORE processing
None is free, which is exactly why they are decided early: recutting changes the contractual structure, a third country agency has its own requirements, and the private market charges. The answer keeping only the private market abandons the two routes that preserve access to the public window, the first of which costs only a documentary reorganization. The one freezing the share at commercial signature errs in the insured's favor and disarms it: the share keeps moving, which is the danger, but it also means it can be raised back.
Glossary entry · credit-caution