Dutch Supreme Court limits tax interest due from CIT payers

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Dutch Supreme Court limits tax interest due from CIT payers

Sponsored by

Sponsored_Firms_piper.png
Sunset over Amsterdam cityscape

Jian-Cheng Ku and Taco Pennings of DLA Piper Netherlands discuss a recent ruling by the Dutch Supreme Court regarding the calculation of corporate income tax interest

On January 16 2026, the Dutch Supreme Court ruled that the tax interest rate applicable on corporate income tax payables is excessive in some years, resulting in a conclusion that the 8% rate applied by the Dutch tax authorities should be reduced to 4%.

Case details

Tax interest on corporate income tax payables starts accruing six months after the fiscal year-end. As of 2022, the applicable tax rate has been 8% for corporate income tax. A taxpayer considered this rate excessively high and challenged it before the courts.

In 2024, the District Court of The Hague ruled that the 8% interest rate was excessive. Subsequently, the case was submitted directly to the Dutch Supreme Court. The state secretary of finance also marked objections from other taxpayers as a “mass objection” procedure (massaalbezwaarprocedure).

Court decision

The Dutch Supreme Court first considered that the tax interest rate set is based on a generally binding regulation. Consequently, the court is allowed to review whether the tax interest rate is compatible with Dutch general principles of law.

Due care and adequate reasoning

When reviewing the regulation from a principles of due care and adequate reasoning perspective, the Dutch Supreme Court noted that, in the case of fiscal measures resulting in increased tax burdens, the court should assess whether the legitimate interests of affected taxpayers have been taken into account.

In this case, the Dutch Supreme Court considered that those interests had been sufficiently taken into account. In this respect, the legislator explicitly recognised that the tax interest rate is perceived as a financial burden by taxpayers. The Dutch Supreme Court therefore agreed with the District Court that the regulation covering tax interest was prepared with due care by the legislator.

Principles of proportionality and equality

The Dutch Supreme Court also reviewed the measure from the perspective of the principle of proportionality. Based on the legislative history, the Dutch Supreme Court concluded that the (high) interest rate primarily served a budgetary purpose and that no additional objectives were identified that could justify imposing a higher tax interest rate only on corporate income tax payers. In this respect, different tax rates apply, for example, for individuals.

Because this budget-driven measure placed an additional financial burden on only one group of otherwise comparable taxpayers without adequate justification, this results in unequal and disproportionate treatment. The Dutch Supreme Court therefore considered that the provision conflicts with the principles of proportionality and equality.

Implications for other cases

With a view to a significant number of pending cases relating to tax interest rates for corporate income tax under the mass objection procedure, the Dutch Supreme Court made the following observations. For similar cases, the tax interest rate should be determined with reference to the rate applicable to other taxes, which should be 4% or 4.5% in the years from 2022 onwards.

Key takeaways

Taxpayers whose objections were designated as part of the mass objection procedure can expect these objections to be resolved in line with this judgment. For companies that have not yet received a final corporate income tax assessment, or received one within the last six weeks, it is important to review and file an objection if the 8% rate has been applied. In this objection, taxpayers can challenge the tax interest rate used and request a recalculation using the updated figure.

This ruling gives a strong legal basis for reduction and recalculation of the applied tax interest.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

As pillar two reshapes global tax competition, the UK faces a crucial challenge: how to remain attractive to multinationals without sacrificing tax revenues
Pillar two may be raising less than expected, but professor René Matteotti says the regime is still changing multinational tax behaviour
Multinationals importing goods into Brazil may need to align TP files and customs documentation more closely as authorities gain new tools to challenge related-party transactions
The private equity-backed deal hands Grant Thornton immediate and impressive US scale, but World Tax data suggests the firm still has work to do to gain recognition
From Instagram content to £100m transactions, the founder of Thomas & Co International discusses building a modern tax and accounting firm for business founders
Growing GAAR scrutiny is driving taxpayers to look beyond legal form and demonstrate the commercial rationale underpinning tax-efficient structures
Pillar two has been clients’ ‘biggest headache’ but also a driver of growth for MHA, which believes it has the edge over its big four rivals
Public country-by-country reporting is exposing multinational tax data to investors, journalists and competitors, creating fresh risks for businesses
Pillar two compliance is creating unprecedented data demands for multinational tax departments, making closer collaboration with FP&A teams essential for accurate reporting and audit readiness
Among the arrivals is Andrew Howell, who leaves scandal-hit PwC Australia after representing PepsiCo in a high-profile TP dispute
Gift this article