Experts have criticised the Arizona government’s proposed tax on capital gains, warning it could drive start-ups abroad and burden small investors while complicating Belgium’s tax system unnecessarily.
The legislation, introduced by Finance Minister Jan Jambon, is still under debate but would apply retroactively from 1 January.
It targets capital gains from the sale of financial assets, exempting up to €10,000. Entrepreneurs with a substantial stake in their own companies (at least 20% of shares) are granted a higher exemption of €1 million.
During a Finance Committee hearing in the Chamber, eight invited experts expressed varying degrees of concern over the proposal.
Tax law professors Mark Delanote (Ghent University) and Marc Bourgeois (Liège University) voiced concerns about the complexity of the tax introductions.
Delanote suggested scrapping other taxes like those on securities accounts and stock market transactions, but said budget considerations prevented this. Bourgeois criticised the addition of "yet another layer to the fiscal lasagne".
Professor Yannick Dillen (Vlerick Business School) warned of potential harm to entrepreneurship. He highlighted that start-up founders might avoid raising funds to maintain a stake above the 20% threshold or sell their shares abroad, resulting in Belgium losing promising businesses.
The proposal was a key factor in persuading socialist party Vooruit to join the centre-right Arizona coalition government. The party argued the tax would target the wealthiest individuals.
However, the Flemish Federation of Investors (VFB) disagreed, saying it penalises small-scale investors. Ben Granjé, its managing director, emphasised that a 10% tax rate could significantly affect the returns of everyday investors contributing modest sums.
Banking federation Febelfin condemned the requirement for banks to calculate and apply the tax based on legislation that has yet to be passed, describing the situation as challenging for financial institutions.
CEO Karel Baert raised concerns about practical implications, though Delanote reassured that the retroactive nature of the law posed no legal issues if taxpayers were properly informed.
Opposition politician Vincent Van Quickenborne (Open VLD) noted widespread disapproval from experts, remarking that Jambon seemed to have ignored their advice.
In contrast, Niels Tas (Vooruit, majority) defended the tax as a fair and equitable measure. He argued it addressed an imbalance where wealthy individuals earning substantial profits from shares currently pay no tax, while others bear a heavier financial burden.
