Consult the full version of today's offical gazette here. Note that this blog post is not written by a human. It was generated by Artificial Intelligence. Read more about what this blog is here.

Summary of Regulatory Changes in the Belgian Official Gazette (June 10, 2025)

Key Regulatory Changes

Constitutional Court Rulings

On April 30, 2025, the Constitutional Court issued several important rulings affecting tax law compliance concerning cross-border transactions. The Court annulled parts of the Flemish decree dated June 26, 2020, which had imposed mandatory automatic information exchange regarding certain cross-border structures per the European Council's directive 2018/822. The justification for this annulment was based on potential infringements of fundamental judicial principles under EU law.

• Example of Change: Prior to this ruling, tax advisors were required to report certain border-crossing structures even if they were protected by attorney-client privilege. Following the ruling, if a tax advisor is relieved of the reporting duty due to their obligation to maintain confidentiality, they are not obligated to inform other intermediaries.

Brussels-Capital Region Ordinance

The Court reviewed an ordinance from the Brussels-Capital Region dated October 29, 2020, which amended the previous legislation concerning the adoption of EU tax directives. The rulings led to the annulment of multiple provisions within the ordinance.

• Example of Change: The ordinance's previous application included various tax types beyond corporate tax without proper justification. Following the court's decision, this application was disallowed, establishing more stringent criteria for legislative changes affecting tax obligations.

Key Legislative Implications

The recent amendments reflect a broader trend towards safeguarding professional confidentiality in taxation and ensuring that tax obligations are clearly defined and justified. The rulings stress the balance between the need for transparency in tax matters and the protection of individual rights under privacy laws.

For stakeholders in the taxes and finance sector, these decisions underscore the importance of evaluating compliance obligations concerning cross-border transactions and adjusting practices accordingly.

Analysis

Note that the AI that generated below text was prompted to be critical and foucs on inconsistencies between new regulations and party promises. Always good to be critical towards the government!

Critical Analysis of Inconsistencies in Party Promises and Recent Regulatory Changes

N-VA (Nieuw-Vlaamse Alliantie): N-VA has consistently advocated for strong governance and the protection of regional interests, with an emphasis on tax reforms that encourage transparency. The Constitutional Court’s ruling to annul parts of the Flemish decree, which mandated automatic information exchange regarding cross-border transactions, could be seen as a setback in their promise to enhance accountability in financial practices. While safeguarding judicial principles is important, the ruling may inadvertently hinder transparency in taxation, which N-VA promotes. They must ensure that the balance between confidentiality and accountability does not lead to more opaque practices in tax compliance.

MR (Mouvement Réformateur): MR champions reduced bureaucratic constraints and efficiency in business operations. The annulment of the mandatory reporting requirement for tax advisors may seem favorable, as it supports privacy and reduces regulatory burdens. However, it raises concerns about whether this will lead to less transparency in financial dealings, which contradicts their commitment to maintaining robust compliance standards. MR needs to assure that while respecting privacy, they do not allow for increased potential for tax evasion or non-compliance among businesses that could harm the overall economic landscape.

CD&V (Christen-Democratisch en Vlaams): CD&V focuses on social equity and responsibilities within taxation. The trends established by the Constitutional Court's rulings, which protect professional confidentiality, align with their promise to ensure fair treatment of all stakeholders. However, if this protection leads to loopholes that allow for evasion or fairness issues within tax systems, it would obscure CD&V’s commitment to equitable and transparent governance. They must advocate for a taxation system that is both just and accountable to minimize disadvantages for those complying with tax regulations.

Vooruit: Vooruit emphasizes equity and the protection of rights, particularly concerning transparency in financial and legal matters. The ruling that enhances confidentiality for tax advisors can support their social justice agenda by protecting individuals’ rights. However, it could contradict their promise to ensure that tax systems are fair and accessible for all citizens if the reduced transparency facilitates abuse or evasion of responsibilities. They should keep a close eye on the implications of these rulings to validate their commitment to equity within the tax framework.

Les Engagés: Les Engagés advocate for responsible governance and transparency. The ruling concerning the confidentiality of tax advisors corresponds with their commitment to uphold individual rights in financial matters. However, if this ruling leads to greater opacity in tax reporting and compliance, it could undermine their promise of social accountability. Additionally, they need to ensure that while promoting privacy rights, the overall framework does not allow for practices that could harm community interests or sustainability initiatives.

Conclusion

The recent regulatory changes reflect Belgium's efforts to balance individual rights and tax transparency. However, inconsistencies arise, particularly surrounding the implications of the Constitutional Court's rulings for transparency in taxation and financial governance. Each political party needs to navigate these complexities to maintain their commitments and ensure that regulations serve the public interest effectively, addressing the needs of their constituents within a fair and accountable framework.