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

India also signed its first-ever bilateral APAs with France, Ireland, Indonesia and Sweden last year, the CBDT revealed
Chile’s revamped GAAR marks a shift toward structural scrutiny, pushing MNEs to strengthen tax governance, economic substance and compliance strategies
New reforms represent the most seismic shift in Canadian TP legislation since its enactment and a clear inflection point for MNEs, ITR has heard
Spain did not transpose EU VAT rules for SMEs or works of art; in other news, an increased VAT threshold came into force in South Africa
While the IBS incorporates taxable events previously covered by state and municipal taxes, its governance and operational logic represent a significant departure from the legacy model
The new office on the fourth floor of 4 More London will span 14,230 square feet, with the potential to expand to the first and second floors
MNEs now face a shift from modelling to execution as the side‑by‑side deal forces tax teams to upgrade systems, harmonise data, and prevent costly pillar two mismatches
As recent surveys suggest a disconnect between AI adoption and employee engagement, the big four risk digging themselves into a strategic hole
Almost three-quarters of surveyed tax professionals are concerned about inaccurate AI outputs; in other news, Dentons hired a partner from CMS to lead its Belgian tax team
Long-running, high-value and complex enquiries are a significant reason for HM Revenue and Customs’s increased TP yield, experts suggest
Gift this article