Home > Legal articles > Netherlands proposes modified innovation box tax regime
The Dutch Ministry of Finance has launched a public consultation on the revision of the Dutch innovation box regime. The main purpose is to bring the regime in line with the final report on action 5 of the OECD base erosion profit shifting (BEPS) project. If the revision is adopted in its current form, some profits will become ineligible for the Netherlands’ lower innovation box tax rate, and some intangibles will no longer qualify for the regime. Interested stakeholders can submit their input or propose amendments to the draft bill until 19 June.
Background
The Dutch innovation regime was introduced in 2007 and amended in 2010 to create a more attractive research and development (R&D) environment in the Netherlands. Profits derived from intangibles that qualify for the innovation box regime are taxed at an effective 5% rate insofar as those benefits exceed the production costs of the intangibles. The regime represents a significant reduction of the tax rate, considering that the normal Dutch corporate income tax rate is 25%.
The OECD’s final report, published in October 2015, adopted the “modified nexus approach” as proposed by Germany and the UK in November 2014. The European Union Code of Conduct Group for Business Taxation endorsed the modified nexus approach in November 2014. The Code of Conduct Group agreed that all patent box regimes within the European Union that are incompatible with the modified nexus approach should be changed in line with the compromise.
During an ECOFIN meeting in December 2014, the Netherlands fully supported the objective to end aggressive tax planning and to put a stop to innovation/patent boxes that encourage profit shifting. In February 2016, the Dutch State Secretary of Finance published the impact assessment report of the Dutch innovation box regime. At the same time, he announced his intention to present a draft bill in September 2016. The impact assessment report showed that the use of the innovation box regime increased dramatically in the Netherlands, from a total tax benefit of EUR 52 million in 2008 to EUR 697 in 2012. The report also showed that, at a minimum, more than 10% of the taxpayers using the innovation box did not create the intangible assets in the Netherlands.
New innovation box proposal
It is proposed that all intangible assets developed after 30 June 2016 be governed by the new regime for financial years beginning on or after 1 January 2017. A grandfathering rule is proposed, providing that qualifying intangible assets created before 30 June 2016 continue to benefit from the current regime until 1 July 2021. Further, patented intangible assets or breeders’ rights developed by the taxpayer before 1 January 2017 will be considered qualifying intangibles under the new regime, even if the proposed additional requirement under (ii) below is not satisfied. These will continue to qualify for the innovation box without a time limit.
The main proposed changes to the innovation box regime are:
The key difference between qualifying expenses in the numerator and the total expenses in the denominator are outsourcing expenses for contractual R&D activities performed by related entities. Expenses for contractual R&D activities performed by third parties form qualifying expenses.
The aim of the 30% up-lift for qualifying expenses is that taxpayers outsourcing only a small part of R&D activities to group companies are not faced with restrictions on the application of the regime. The OECD final report allows states to introduce a 30% up-lift for qualifying expenses within the nexus approach. The draft bill suggests using the full 30% up-lift.
Finally, the OECD report and the draft bill do not introduce detailed rules to calculate the profits attributable to the qualifying intangible assets. The calculation of the benefits should be determined on a case-by-case basis. Different economic approaches are used, such as the “paring method” and the “per asset method.” This is in line with current practice.
If the draft bill containing the revisions to the regime is adopted in its current form, certain profits will become ineligible for the lower tax rate resulting from the innovation box regime, and certain intangibles will no longer be covered by the innovation box regime. Interested stakeholders can submit their input or proposed amendments to the draft bill until 19 June.
15 April 2021
OECD commentaries – how they affect interpretation of double tax treaties after adoption
16 December 2020
Dutch Supreme Court goes back to roots of participation exemption
17 November 2020
Foreign investment funds can get Dutch dividend withholding tax refund, on strict terms
17 September 2020
Dutch 2021 budget increases tax burden on large corporate taxpayers
24 March 2020
How new and existing Dutch tax measures can help mitigate financial impact of coronavirus
13 March 2020
It depends – ECJ gives guidance on tax refunds for dividends paid to non-resident funds
17 December 2019
15 October 2019
The General Court’s Starbucks and FIAT rulings: what’s new and what’s not
15 October 2019
How general counsel can respond to the Starbucks and FIAT judgments
15 October 2019
2020 budget raises CIT burden and limits using the Netherlands in aggressive tax planning
De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek
Claude Debussylaan 80
1082 MD Amsterdam
The Netherlands
P.O. Box 75084
1070 AB Amsterdam
The Netherlands