The 30% Tax Rule in the Netherlands: Crucial in nurturing Innovation and Growth
Introduction
It’s been a hot topic already for a few days now: the Dutch Parliament looking to scale down the 30% tax ruling. Within BUX we have many people that we gave a warm welcome from abroad to help build up this company. In case anyone has missed it, the plan would be the introduction of a stepped approach by January 2024:
Luckily, the current beneficiaries are allowed to keep the benefits they were promised.
The recent voting in favour by Parliament to restrict the 30% tax ruling in the Netherlands has sparked a heated debate among mostly entrepreneurs, CEOs, and founders. The 30% tax ruling, a beneficial incentive, has long been a cornerstone for attracting international talent and fostering innovation in the Dutch business landscape. I speak from experience here that we were able to attract some amazing people that built the foundation of the BUX company today.
With this article I would like to create further attention to this topic as there is still a small possibility of reversing the proposal in the Senate. However, it's mostly aimed at clarifying why this 30% tax rule is so important and create awareness regarding this across my network.
Purpose of the 30% tax rule
The 30% tax rule has undeniably served as a critical tool in attracting highly skilled workers from across the globe. It grants tax advantages to expatriates, ensuring that a significant portion (30%) of their income is tax-exempt. This benefit has been crucial in luring top-tier talent to the Netherlands, helping companies access specialised expertise, promoting knowledge exchange, and fuelling economic growth.
However, the recent move to restrict this ruling poses a significant threat to the vibrant, innovative environment that the Netherlands has carefully cultivated. The ruling’s restriction risks stalling the influx of top-tier professionals, hindering progress, and adversely affecting the country's international competitiveness.
Impact on innovation
The Netherlands has long been recognised for its innovative prowess, partly due to its open and welcoming approach to international talent. The restriction of the 30% tax ruling jeopardises this unique position. International founders and CEOs have expressed concerns over the potential consequences. They argue that this restriction will not only deter highly-skilled individuals from coming to the Netherlands, but also lead to a brain drain, as existing talent might seek opportunities in countries with more favourable tax regimes.
Furthermore, the long-term impact on entrepreneurship in the Netherlands could be substantial. Limiting access to this tax benefit might dissuade entrepreneurs from establishing or expanding businesses in the country, reducing the incentive for business development, and ultimately affecting the overall tax revenues and economic growth.
领英推荐
Why is keeping the 30% tax rule crucial?
The 30% tax rule is essential for maintaining the Netherlands' unique position in the global landscape. It not only attracts top talent, but also contributes to a diverse, dynamic, and innovative business environment. Preserving this ruling is crucial to fostering a culture of entrepreneurship, driving progress, and maintaining the competitive edge that the Netherlands has established.
The 30% tax rule plays a pivotal role in attracting talent and fostering an environment conducive to innovation and development. The Netherlands has thrived on its openness to the international community, leveraging diverse skill sets and knowledge to create a competitive business landscape. Restricting this rule significantly jeopardises this progress.
By maintaining the 30% tax ruling, the Netherlands can continue to position itself as a hub for innovation, attract and retain top talent, and support the growth of a thriving entrepreneurial ecosystem. It's essential for the government to reconsider and preserve this vital incentive for the long-term prosperity and success of the country.
So what now?
There are a few things that we can do to help reverse this decision in the Dutch senate. Something I feel obligated to do to preserve the future position of the Netherlands as an internationally strong and competitive player driving innovation and future development.
There are a few things that we can do fight this to the best of our abilities:
By actively pursuing these next steps, CEOs, founders, and entrepreneurs can collaborate to articulate the profound significance of the 30% tax ruling and work towards a resolution that ensures the continued growth and prosperity of the Dutch business ecosystem. Thank you!
?
?
Persoonlijk begeleider
11 个月Je hebt ons helemaal op het verkeerde been gezet Yorick Naeff
Yorick Naeff I couldn't agree more with what you described in this insightful article of yours. This move from the Dutch government is definitely not a wise one and in the worst timing for expatriates (high costs currently affecting the Netherlands). There is though a slight misunderstanding in your article, actually current beneficiaries will be affected by this new rule if they secure a new role after Jan-24. Only those keeping the same emplyment contract across the 5 years will not be affected.
“Let’s put wings on it” | Co-founder | Startup CEO | Venture Partner | Board Member (Advisory) | Corporate Strategy and Data Driven Executionist | Senior Information Risk Owner
1 年Yorick Naeff I second your opinion. This restriction is felt by entrepreneurs, CEOs, and founders, as you correctly state, and foreign talent that has an option to choose their location. It is a short tem populist political move with long term greater consequences, in the same trend as reducing Schiphol, the full stop in real estate, etc., which is meant to appeal to the approval of the average Joe and Jane. However abondoning the reality that eventually this will lead to less jobs overall, even fewer scaleups and growth companies, less Dutch innovation, and less tax income for the country. The current generation of political leadership sees “NL.corp” as stationary, which is a post-war illusion. If Covid has thought anything, is that today’s tech employees are nomads, and so are companies.
Software Developer/Architect
1 年The purpose of this ruling is not to help expats. The purpose is to help Dutch firms import highly qualified individuals at reduced cost. It does not prevent firms from employing people from outside of the country. They can always do that just by paying them more. Offer more than London and they will come. But, perhaps, you need to offer the locals the same pay. So, the operating costs increase and it becomes harder to be competitive. These people have a choice and, if they have no special reason to pick The Netherlands, they will not. And that was a way to attract them, since otherwise The Netherlands is simply not a good deal. The salaries are not very high, the cost of living is not very low, the taxes are very high, and what you get back from the government for your taxes is very little. Even though the taxes go up to 52%, you get just AOW (800 euros pension) included in that, you have to pay health insurance on top of it, the day care costs 1600 per month per child, you pay very high BPM when you buy a car and very high wegenbelasting. Germany, Austria, and Switzerland are a much better deal. Probably Luxembourg, Belgium, and France too. Certainly Sweden and Norway.
Cell & Gene Therapy New Business Coach
1 年With new elections ahead in the Netherlands, political parties are in search of “easy bait” for attracting voters. Anybody suggesting that everybody can enjoy the same benefits from the system irrespective of the energy they put into it, has an easy audience at moment .