Dutch wealth taxation under box 3 remains a legal and political minefield in 2026. Despite repeated rulings from the Supreme Court that the old deemed-return system was unlawful, no permanent solution exists yet. The Senate is reviewing a new bill that would tax wealth gains, but economists and legal experts warn this system is also vulnerable to further litigation. Meanwhile, Supreme Court guidance shows that taxpayers who filed late objections have no right to compensation, even if the levy was unlawful. The debate touches on a fundamental question: may the government tax returns that exist only on paper? And how can wealth inequality be prevented without disproportionately burdening the middle class? Libaros presents the figures and legal developments in order, without judgment but with all the facts you need to draw your own conclusion.
Netherlands
Box 3 taxes wealth above the exemption threshold (EUR 57,000 per person in 2026, EUR 114,000 for fiscal partners) at a rate that increases with wealth size. According to calculations by economist Bas Jacobs, the effective rate can reach 54% for wealth above EUR 1 million, depending on actual returns. This figure is controversial: critics argue the rate only reaches this level at low returns, while supporters emphasize these are paper gains not always realized. Source: BNR.nl, 19 May 2026. In practice, someone with EUR 500,000 in a savings account earning 2% interest generates EUR 10,000 annual return but pays approximately EUR 4,500 in tax, an effective rate of 45%. For investors with higher returns (for example 7% on equities) the burden is lower, but the law makes no distinction between asset classes. This creates situations where savers are hit harder than investors, which the Supreme Court in earlier rulings called unjust. A critical point: anyone who failed to object to an assessment in the past has no right to compensation according to recent Supreme Court guidance, even if the levy later proved unlawful. This affects an estimated tens of thousands of taxpayers who assumed the government would automatically correct the error. Source: Accountancy Vanmorgen, 8 May 2026. For those considering relocation or wealth restructuring: legal uncertainty remains, and new legislation can be challenged again. Compare your situation with Netherlands →
Compare your situation with Netherlands →
Perspective:
wealth taxation in European context Box 3 does not stand alone. Many European countries have abolished wealth tax (Germany, Sweden, Austria) or only have inheritance tax. Portugal offers through the IFICI regime (launched 2026) ten years of exemption from wealth return taxation for new tax residents, provided they invest at least EUR 500,000 in real estate or businesses. Spain has a wealth tax (Impuesto sobre el Patrimonio) that varies by region, with rates up to 3.5% in some autonomous communities, but Madrid offers full exemption. For Dutch HNWI seeking to escape box 3 pressure, three scenarios are realistic: (1) emigration to a country without wealth tax, (2) restructuring through a foreign holding (with attention to the 10-year lookback period on emigration), or (3) waiting until legislation is final before taking action. Each scenario carries tax, legal, and lifestyle implications extending beyond the tax rate alone. The Libaros Freedom Score weighs five dimensions: tax burden, passport mobility, residence options, property rights, and lifestyle. Box 3 primarily affects the first dimension, but a relocation decision depends on all five. Those focusing solely on tax savings may end up in a jurisdiction with weaker legal protection or limited healthcare access. The figures are clear, the choice is yours.