Tax Updates

On Monday evening 5 October the Senate Finance committee met minister Heinen and junior minister Eerenberg to talk about Box 3. According to FD, a Senate majority is now willing to handle the novelle before Christmas. That is what it takes if the capital gains tax on financial instruments is going to start in 2028.

Nobody is relaxed about it. Eerenberg said the margins are now "in the order of days". Senators stressed care, workability and the still unclear rules for crypto. Urgent advice from the Council of State is expected at the end of October. After that the cabinet wants to send the novelle to the Lower House in early November, and the Tax Administration is working on an implementation review.

The Senate has not yet published official short notes of the meeting. What we know so far comes from the press and the video recording.

On Thursday 1 October 2026, day two of the General Financial Debates (AFB), minister Heinen (Finance) pledged that the cabinet will raise the small-saver threshold in Box 3 so fewer people become liable. FD reported that around 12:23; ANP/ND confirm Heinen is open to a different floor and wants to discuss it with parliament ("a lot of number-crunching").

That mainly touches the €1,000 tax-free result from the 29 September cabinet letter (was €1,800 in the actual-return bill). Press points to a higher threshold; there is no new official figure and no revised cabinet letter.

A day earlier the plan already cracked in the first debate (FD 30 Sep):

On Tuesday 29 September 2026 prime minister Jetten, minister Heinen and junior minister Eerenberg sent the parliamentary letter [Voorstellen op box 3, koopkracht werkenden en sociale zekerheid](https://www.tweedekamer.nl/kamerstukken/brieven_regering/detail?id=2026Z20444&did=2026D47255) (dossier 37020-62, document 2026D47255). It is the concrete follow-up to the four scenarios of 14 September and the still-open Senate track.

Core of the Box 3 part, in the letter's own framing:

1. Fast route via a novelle. A novelle (amending bill) will be filed on the actual-return bill. Goal: move as much wealth as possible under capital gains as quickly as possible, also answering motions Eerdmans/Bikker and Vermeer.

On Tuesday 22 September 2026 the Senate Finance Committee discussed dossier 36.748: the letter from the minister and junior minister of Finance on progress adapting Box 3 (actual-return bill), following the four scenarios of 14 September.

According to the official short notes, the committee decided to:

1. Invite. Invite the junior minister and the minister of Finance as soon as possible, but after the Lower House General Financial Considerations (AFB), for an oral consultation on Box 3 progress.

The actual-return bill passed the Lower House on 12 February 2026 but has not cleared the Senate. Political support for taxing unrealised (paper) gains has weakened further. The Senate asked hundreds of questions, held hearings on paper gains, and deferred the vote.

On 30 June 2026 a Senate majority — on a GroenLinks-PvdA proposal — postponed the vote until an announced cabinet amendment (novelle) could be considered. Critics called the bill a messy “halfway station”; junior finance minister Eerenberg refused to withdraw it.

In June the cabinet still promised improvements (including loss carry-back, life events, startups, green investing) around Budget Day. That amendment never arrived.

From parliamentary papers accompanying a letter by junior finance minister Eerenberg:

After the Christmas judgment (24 December 2021), taxpayers who timely objected — or whose assessment was not yet final on that date — received Box 3 redress. A large group was left out: anyone who did not object (or objected too late), and whose 2017–2020 assessment was already final on 24 December 2021.

Those “non-objectors” later asked for ex officio reduction or objected to earlier refusals. That track ran as mass objection plus. The core question: is the Christmas judgment enough to force redress for final assessments?

No. The Supreme Court held that non-objectors have no right to a reduction or refund of Box 3 tax for 2017 through 2020.

The Tax Administration prolonged the general extension for filing Actual Return (OWR) forms to 1 October 2026. Previously the general extension ran to 1 May 2026.

It covers OWR forms that must be filed after a reasoned letter following an earlier objection or ex officio reduction request. Advisers then need not request an extension case by case.

The general extension applies only if:

Fiscal partners are allowed to freely allocate their Box 3 assets between them in the tax return. This can be advantageous: if one partner has more tax-free allowance remaining, redistributing the tax base can reduce the combined tax bill.

With assessments reduced through the mass objection procedure, it was unclear whether this reallocation option still applied. The assessment had already been issued. Could it still be adjusted?

The Supreme Court answered yes. Fiscal partners who received a reduction through the mass objection procedure have 6 weeks after the reduction notice to adjust their mutual Box 3 allocation. The ruling is ECLI:NL:HR:2026:495.

Shortly before the final vote on the Wet Werkelijk Rendement, MP Vlottes (VVD) tabled a motion with a direct demand: remove the annual tax on unrealised capital gains from the bill. Anyone holding shares that rise in value but does not sell should not face a tax bill for gains they have not yet received.

The Lower House rejected the motion. A majority was not prepared to scrap the mark-to-market wealth tax before the law had even been adopted.

Two days later, on 12 February 2026, the same House approved the bill as it stood, including the annual tax on paper gains.

The political debate over the Wet Werkelijk Rendement has for months focused on one central question: is it fair to tax gains that have not yet been realised? Under the mark-to-market wealth tax, rising share prices are taxed annually, even if you have not received a penny.

In response to this criticism, the cabinet has committed to investigating whether the mark-to-market system could be replaced by a capital gains tax for more asset categories. A capital gains tax applies only upon sale, eliminating the liquidity problems that arise with unrealised gains.

The current law already combines two systems: real estate and start-up stakes fall under the capital gains tax (taxed at sale), while listed shares, bonds, and savings fall under the mark-to-market system. The cabinet is now exploring whether that second category can be broadened.

The Opgaaf Werkelijk Rendement (OWR) sounds appealing: if you earned less than the notional rates, you can report your actual return and reduce your tax bill. But the reality is more nuanced.

The core issue: the OWR calculation does not apply the tax-free threshold. Actual return is calculated on your total Box 3 assets, whereas the notional system first deducts the exemption (€57,684 for single filers, €115,368 for tax partners) before applying the rates.

Say you have €100,000 in investments and earn a 4% return (€4,000) in 2025. That is well below the notional rate of 5.88%. Yet the notional system can still produce a lower tax bill.

On 17 and 18 March 2026, the Senate Finance Committee held the previously announced oral consultations with State Secretary Eerenberg on the Wet Werkelijk Rendement. Eerenberg acknowledged the legislative process had been "not optimal" but continued with the regular parliamentary procedure.

The most concrete outcome: the cabinet will actively investigate whether a carry-back provision is feasible. This would allow taxpayers to offset a Box 3 loss against tax paid in previous years , effectively claiming a refund for past years when the new system produces a loss.

In practice: someone who incurs a Box 3 loss in 2028 or later could carry that loss back to a prior year and recover tax previously paid. This is a significant change from the original bill, which only allowed losses to be carried forward against future tax liability.

From 1 March 2026, the 2025 income tax return is open for filing. The standard deadline is 1 May 2026, unless you request an extension.

Box 3 still uses the notional return system for 2025. The definitive rates are:

Many people read Minister Heinen's announcement last week as meaning the annual tax on unrealised gains would be dropped. That is not correct.

Heinen's only concrete proposal was loss carry-back, which the Lower House had already called for in a motion. The vermogensaanwasbelasting itself, the annual tax on unrealised gains due to take effect in 2028, he is leaving untouched for now. State Secretary Eerenberg made this explicit after the cabinet meeting on Friday: "We are working from the current bill. It has not been withdrawn."

The reason is straightforward. Dropping the annual gains tax would cost the treasury €2.4 billion a year. There is no plan to fill that gap.

On 26 February 2026, the Lower House passed a motion filed by ChristenUnie and JA21, with support from the VVD among others. The motion calls on the government to include loss carry-back provisions in the revised Box 3 bill that Minister Heinen is preparing.

This is a concrete new requirement on top of the revision already announced. Heinen had already indicated that the bill would be revised following resistance in the Senate, but the details remain unknown. The motion makes clear what the Lower House expects to see in the revised proposal.

Under the Wet Werkelijk Rendement, you pay tax on your actual return. In a good year you pay tax on gains. But what happens in a bad year when your portfolio falls?

Minister Heinen is going to revise the Box 3 bill. What exactly will change is not yet known, but it is clear where the main friction lies: the wealth accretion tax (vermogensaanwasbelasting).

That term refers to a system in which you pay tax on the increase in value of your investments, even if you have not sold them. The gain exists on paper, but the money is still locked in shares, crypto, or a company. Yet the Tax Authority wants to levy tax on it immediately.

That is exactly what has triggered broad resistance, from investors and crypto holders to startup employees who receive shares as part of their compensation. Prince Constantijn of Orange put it plainly on behalf of the tech sector: if you own shares in a startup that have risen in value, you have not received a single euro, but you would already face a tax bill.

Minister Eelco Heinen of Finance announced on 25 February 2026 that he will revise the Box 3 bill. He is going back to the drawing board. The Financieele Dagblad reported this on Wednesday morning.

The trigger was twofold: a wave of investor protests and critical remarks from the Senate at the start of its review process. The combination appears to have convinced Heinen that the current bill is politically unsustainable in the Senate.

Heinen warns that reform of the tax on investment returns remains necessary, and that no additional budget is available for changes that would reduce revenue.

The Finance Committee (FIN) of the Eerste Kamer (Senate) met on 24 February 2026 to discuss the procedure for reviewing bill 36.748. The outcome was a concrete first step: the Ministry of Finance has been asked to hold a technical briefing on 17 March 2026.

Source: eerstekamer.nl

A technical briefing is a presentation by civil servants explaining the content of the bill. It is not a political debate, but an opportunity for senators to ask questions about how the law works in practice, including questions on enforceability, transitional rules, and the technical details of the wealth accretion tax.

Today, 24 February 2026, the Finance Committee (FIN) of the Eerste Kamer (Senate) discusses the procedure for reviewing bill 36.748, the Wet Werkelijk Rendement Box 3. This is the first formal step now that the bill has been referred from the Lower House.

Source: eerstekamer.nl

In the Senate, the review of any bill always starts with agreeing on the procedure. The committee decides how and when it wants to examine the bill: when is the deadline for written questions, does the committee want a hearing with external experts, and how long does the cabinet have to respond?

Most countries tax capital gains only when an asset is sold, using the realisation basis. From 2028, the Netherlands takes the opposite approach for shares and investment funds: an annual levy on unrealised appreciation. That difference in timing creates a new problem for anyone holding foreign assets.

Say you own shares in an American company. The US taxes the gain only when you sell. The Netherlands taxes that same gain every year. There is no moment at which both countries are taxing the same income, because they use fundamentally different definitions of when a gain becomes taxable. The result can be double taxation on the same wealth, with no tax treaty offering a way out.

This was flagged by tax adviser Rutger van Esch (BDO Tax & Legal) in the February issue of Vakblad Estate Planning. His conclusion: the Netherlands is once again becoming an 'odd one out' internationally.

On 12 February 2026, a broad majority of the Dutch Lower House approved the Wet Werkelijk Rendement Box 3. This represents a significant step towards a fundamental overhaul of the wealth tax.

But the law is not yet final. Under the Dutch legislative process, the Eerste Kamer (Senate) must also give its approval. Until that happens, the law can still be rejected, amended, or postponed.

The Eerste Kamer (Senate) reviews legislation primarily for quality, enforceability, and constitutionality - not for political desirability. It is customary for the Senate to ask probing questions, especially on complex tax legislation.

On social media and at family dinners, you sometimes hear it stated as fact: the government has decided not to tax unrealised capital gains after all. "They're switching to a capital gains tax," people say. "Shares will only be taxed when you sell them."

That is incorrect. And this misunderstanding can lead to costly financial mistakes.

Below, we set out precisely what has been passed into law, what remains a political ambition, and why that ambition is far from certain.

The Dutch Tax Authority (Belastingdienst) has published the definitive fictitious return percentages for tax year 2025 in box 3. These rates apply under the current interim system, which remains in place until the Wet Werkelijk Rendement takes effect on 1 January 2028.

Confirmed rates for 2025:

On 12 February 2026, a broad majority of the Dutch Lower House (Tweede Kamer) approved the Wet Werkelijk Rendement Box 3. This means that the current interim system - based on fictitious returns per asset category - will be replaced from 1 January 2028 by a system that taxes actual returns.

The new law introduces the following fundamental changes:

Following the Lower House approval on 12 February 2026, it has been confirmed that the Wet Werkelijk Rendement Box 3 will take effect on 1 January 2028, one year later than the originally planned date of 1 January 2027.

The delay gives taxpayers, implementing organisations, and financial institutions more time to prepare for the new system.

Importantly, the law has not yet been formally enacted. The Eerste Kamer (Senate) still needs to consider and approve the bill. Only after Senate approval will the law be formally adopted.

In December 2021, the Dutch Supreme Court (Hoge Raad) made a landmark ruling: the Box 3 system violated the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The system taxed taxpayers on the basis of a high fictitious return, while savers in reality earned far less due to low interest rates.

This led to a mass objection procedure and ultimately to legal redress for the years 2017–2022.

On 6 June 2024, the Supreme Court provided further clarity on the scope of legal redress. The central question was: does every taxpayer have the right to individual assessment, or only those who had filed a timely objection?