The Netherlands has updated its guidance on the corporate interest deduction limitation, clarifying the treatment of adjusted taxable profit, financial instruments, asset transactions, and interest-related expenses under the earnings stripping rules.
The Netherlands published Policy Decision No. 2026-17016 of 10 September 2026 from the State Secretary of Finance on 22 September 2026, updating and replacing the 2025 decision on the interest deduction limitation, or earnings stripping, rules.
The decision provides administrative guidelines on the application of the generic interest deduction limitation (earnings stripping rule) under Article 15b of the Corporate Income Tax Act 1969 (CITA / Wet op de vennootschapsbelasting 1969).
This 2026 Dutch policy decree provides comprehensive guidance on the earnings stripping measure, a tax rule designed to prevent base erosion by limiting net interest deductions for corporate taxpayers. The regulation stipulates that net interest is generally non-deductible if it exceeds 24.5% of a company’s adjusted profit or a threshold of EUR 1 million.
The policy decree also clarifies essential legal definitions, such as what constitutes a loan agreement and how to treat specialised financial instruments like interest rate swaps, factoring, and embedded derivatives.
The key updates are as follows:
Section 2.2.7: Sale of future cash flows
Taxpayers may monetise future cash flows by transferring their rights to those revenues to a third party in exchange for a lump-sum payment (e.g., assigning royalty receivables under a licensing agreement or ceding future lease payment instalments).
Where the taxpayer recognises the lump-sum purchase price as tax revenue included in annual profit, the transfer agreement is not classified as a loan agreement or an agreement comparable to a loan (MEGVO) for Article 15b CITA purposes.
As such, it does not give rise to interest expense or interest income subject to the earnings stripping rule.
Section 2.5.2: Reversal of write-downs on receivables
CITA Article 13ba requires taxpayers to add back previously claimed tax write-downs on debt receivables to taxable profit under specific circumstances.
The statutory add-back under Article 13ba is not treated as interest income (rentebate) when calculating net interest expenses under Article 15b CITA.
Even if the underlying receivable write-down resulted from currency losses, the mandatory add-back under Article 13ba(1) CITA does not constitute a currency gain or interest income under Article 15b(6)(c) CITA.
Section 4: Tax-free shipping reserve
Adjusted taxable profit is calculated before applying CITA Article 15b(1). Tax-exempt income, including the Tax-Free Shipping Reserve, exempt debt relief profits, and participation exemption benefits, does not affect the calculation.
Section 4.2.4: Asset Revaluations under CITA Article 20a
An upward asset value adjustment under CITA Article 20a(12) is not treated as a reversal of a prior write-down under Article 15b(3)(b). Therefore, it is not deducted when calculating adjusted taxable profit.
Section 4.5.2: Housing associations and EU law compatibility
Article 15b CITA contains no general exemption for social housing corporations, meaning interest deduction limitations can apply to them. The decree affirms that applying the earnings stripping rule to housing associations is compatible with EU law.
Beyond the specific updates introduced in Policy Decision No. 2026-17016, the document outlines several other important guidelines regarding how the generic interest deduction limitation under Article 15b of the Corporate Income Tax Act 1969 (CITA) is applied in practice:
Classification of financial instruments & agreements
- Interest: Statutory interest under civil law is included in the net interest calculation because delayed payments effectively provide financing. In contrast, tax interest and recovery interest are excluded because tax liabilities do not arise from loan agreements.
- DBFMO contracts: Design, Build, Finance, Maintain, and Operate contracts in public-private partnerships can be treated as loan-like agreements. The financing and interest components identified in the project’s financial model are therefore included in the interest calculation.
- Factoring: Non-recourse factoring, where receivables and default risk are fully transferred, is not treated as a loan. Recourse factoring may be considered a loan-like agreement depending on the specific terms and circumstances.
- Interest rate swaps: A standalone interest rate swap is not a loan. However, gains and losses from swaps used to hedge interest risks on loans are included in interest income or expenses. This also applies to amounts arising from a mandatory break clause.
Asymmetric treatment of certain expenses vs. income
- Penalty interest & guarantee fees: Penalty interest and guarantee fees paid by a debtor are categorised as interest expenses. However, for the recipient, received penalty interest and guarantee fees do not qualify as interest income.
- Commitment fees: Fees paid to keep a facility available (e.g., revolving credit) are not treated as interest expenses until the funds are actually drawn down.
Calculating adjusted profit
- Capitalised interest: Interest capitalised as part of production costs is excluded when computing adjusted profit. Where capitalised interest exceeds interest income, this can result in a negative adjustment (addition) to profit, effectively reducing interest deduction capacity.
- Asset disposals and liquidation losses: Gains or losses from selling assets and deductible liquidation losses are not treated as write-downs or reversals, so they do not affect adjusted taxable profit.
- Tonnage tax regime: Profits determined under the tonnage tax regime are included in adjusted taxable profit. However, fixed tonnage profits do not generate interest income or expenses, and the statutory EUR 1 million threshold is not allocated or split across tonnage tax activities.
- Per-element approach & foreign entities: Profits of non-Dutch group entities are excluded from adjusted taxable profit, even where they could qualify for a Dutch fiscal unity. The decision confirms that this approach is compatible with the EU freedom of establishment.
