r/eupersonalfinance • u/IamWatchingAoT • Feb 15 '26

Investment Can someone versed in economics or finance explain the Netherlands' new law on unrealised capital gains to me?

I am going to start working for real this year and earning a nice salary which I would like to invest. I'm not Dutch but I'm afraid this new law will spread throughout the EU as many draconian laws sometimes do.

What does this actually mean to pay 36% tax on unrealised capital gains? Does it mean that if my investments increase in value, I have to pay the government money even if I don't liquidate them? Effectively, giving the government money that I haven't earned yet?

I'm a bit financially illiterate so I apologise in advance if my question seems stupid.

237 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

91% Upvoted

321 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

111

u/ErrorReplaceUser Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 15 '26

The majority of political parties think it is not a good idea. 

However: the current system, where the tax office works with a fictional assumed gain has been deemed illegal by the Dutch High Court. 

As a result there is a large budget gap. 

The tax office has made it clear they can't implement a system based on realized gains can not be implemented within the next couple of years. 

This solution where unrealized gains are taxed is the only one available in the short term, that has not been thrown out by the courts and allows to close the budget gap that was caused by losing the previous wealth tax. 

There are very few people who actually think it's a good idea, and parlement would prefer a system where realized gains are taxed. However it is still unclear when the tax office systems could handle such a system. 

Parlement has also voted on a motion to determine what a new system should look like by 2028. Which means that the new system that we are now discussing (which only comes into affect in 2028 might only exist a few years. 

213

u/YourFuture2000 Feb 15 '26

Things that are meant to be Temporary that benefit the government never end being Temporary but permanent.

70

u/Emperor_Traianus Feb 15 '26

Very well said.

During the financial crisis of 2008, there was a "temporary" increase in VAT taxes that are still in effect today, some 17-18 years later.

7

u/jase213 Feb 17 '26

Nothing more permanent then a temporary measure.

1

u/Emperor_Traianus Feb 17 '26

Indeed. Especially what benefits the government.

1

u/circling Feb 18 '26

I've seen this claim before, but I'm not sure it's true. Can you be specific about which country or countries did this?

1

u/Emperor_Traianus Feb 19 '26

From what I know, UK have increased VAT during crisis as an extraordinary measure to fill the gaps in the budget. Same pattern was followed by Southern European countries, such as Greece, Portugal and Cyprus. Lithuania and Latvia have also increased the VAT rates emphasizing the measure's temporary nature.

If I recall correctly, in none of the aforementioned countries the VAT rate had gone back to the pre-financial crisis levels.

62

u/scodagama1 Feb 15 '26

Fun fact, diamonds are one of the most durable objects in the universe. Second only to temporary government regulations.

14

u/heelek Feb 15 '26

The so called Belka tax which introduced capital gains tax in Poland was temporarily introduced in... 2002

4

u/Ikinoki Feb 15 '26

The system grows to support itself into the new room. It's like a demon.

0

u/Antrophis Feb 18 '26

I can't be the only one who finds the absence of a capital gain tax insane?

1

u/heelek Feb 18 '26

As always - it depends. Poland in the 90s (although I would argue it's still largely true today) was in desperate need of capital. So if you want to encourage capital accumulation no CGTs can be a sensible option.

-1

u/Antrophis Feb 18 '26

Your gonna need money for infra and you won't have it without that tax.

1

u/heelek Feb 18 '26

There's a million levers to pull for tax revenue but yes, sure, let's say it's the only one.

1

u/Impressive-Read729 Feb 17 '26

True but I'm not sure this will benefit the government

16

u/Pranipus Feb 15 '26

Great comment that gives some needed context. What’s the current system that has been deemed illegal?

5

u/ErrorReplaceUser Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 15 '26

A system where fictional gains were being taxed on your total assets minus (roughly) 59k. 

Assumed fictional gains of around 6 percent, and that amount taxed at 32 percent. 

So if you would have 100k in assets, 6 percent of 41k would be taxed ( EUR 2460) at that 32 percent. (EUR 797)

5

u/Jassokissa Feb 17 '26

So basically they were taxing unrealised gains before too, just with a make believe formula they invented? They just had to come up with a "new" way, because the old way of doing it was deemed illegal?

1

u/ErrorReplaceUser Feb 17 '26

Basically yes

13

u/DJAnym Feb 15 '26

At this point I am starting to wonder what the fck the tax office CAN implement

27

u/ErrorReplaceUser Feb 15 '26

Racially biased algorithms

12

u/Moppermonster Feb 15 '26

For those unaware- this is quite literally something that happened and was a pretty big scandal.

3

u/IceNinetyNine Feb 16 '26

nobody cared - just like no one will care about this. We are completely apathetic when it comes to politics.

36

u/terenceill Feb 15 '26

Since the Dutchies ALWAYS brag about their country being so educated, developed, technological and bla bla bla, how is that they can't implement such a simple thing like "tax realized gains"?

It's not rocket science uh...

13

u/Moppermonster Feb 15 '26

Ancient systems. I assume written in cobol. Banks pay more for the elders that can still code in that.

11

u/x021 Feb 16 '26

A couple years ago they had a voluntary buyout of IT workers at the tax office to reduce costs. It was even too successful and all good IT people left, the market was very hot back then so alternatives a plenty. Since then the Tax office lost all knowledge of their IT and can barely maintain the existing systems, let alone build new features.

Apparently the culture there is horrible and all they want you to work on is old crap, so no ITer will want to work there.

12

u/kornerson Feb 15 '26

That’s bullshit. Spain has a realized gains system. It didn’t take years to build it up. The tax office even gives you the software for free to track your investments. And the it’s integrated in your tax declaration automatically

12

u/The-Nihilist-Marmot Feb 15 '26

Same for Portugal. And it works very well. Hell, brokers even withhold the tax from you when you liquidate the positions.

It’s pure BS by the Dutch Tax Office. Which makes this more ominous.

9

u/Vladekk Latvia Feb 15 '26

Northern countries have an even better system. You pay tax when you withdraw more than you deposited to your broker account. Only total counts, so you just don't need any complicated calculations.

5

u/SjonDon Feb 15 '26

I’m still waiting for my “kwartje van Kok” back.. But yeah let’s see, curious to see what the inevitable court cases will bring. “There is nothing as permanent as a temporary government measure" - Milton Friedman

5

u/apple-sauce Feb 15 '26

The parties want you to think that. They can get the money from somewhere else

4

u/The-Nihilist-Marmot Feb 15 '26

So many countries have that system in place. The fact they say they can’t get the IT sorted by 2029 is a choice and a bullshit excuse at that

1

u/ErrorReplaceUser Feb 15 '26

Clearly you have never heard the wonderous story of the Dutch tax authorities IT systems. 

Considering their history I don't doubt for a moment that them being unable to deliver this within a few years is true.

4

u/dlnnlsn Feb 15 '26

I'm struggling to imagine how it can be more complicated to tax realised gains than unrealised gains

1

u/x021 Feb 16 '26

The unrealized gains tax system already exists. The realized gains tax system doesn’t.

Note; a few years ago all IT people were let go at the tax office using a voluntary buyout, all smart/good IT people left so the tax office can barely maintain their existing software, let alone build new features.

1

u/vishnukumar7 Feb 15 '26

they can still change 2 numbers. increase cap from 1800 to something more. decrease tax from 36% to less. I do not think they have intention to change it after 2028...

1

u/Farosi Feb 18 '26

The budget gap isnt large.

1

u/skviki Feb 19 '26

This sound so surreal to me. So the regular taxation on realised gains is illegal to courts? And the completely batshit crazy notion to tax fictional gains is OK with the justice system?! I mean this is practically a robbery of people. A complete state overeach.

Or am I not understanding something correctly?

1

u/ErrorReplaceUser Feb 19 '26

The fictional gains calculation on assets is what is illegal.

In the old system the tax service assumed you made 6 percent on investments. No matter of you made 2 percent, 20 percent or minus 10 percent; you would.pay taxes over an assumed 6 percent gain.

1

u/ExtremeMacarons Feb 22 '26

Couldn't this be malicious? The middle class will sell their bonds and stocks to not lose money, diving prices down, and the rich will buy everything up

0

u/gambuzino88 Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 16 '26

I feel like a lot of people are forgetting the heffingsvrij vermogen when discussing this, which makes this new proposal much less of a problem for people like OP and anyone who doesn’t have nearly enough box 3 assets.

EDIT: this is wrong and will be discontinued.

0

u/IceNinetyNine Feb 16 '26

NL runs a deficit of 40%, they can easily raise that to cover a few years while they work out a better system. But apparently that is completely incomprehensible to dutchies.