Regulatory Update in Belgium: Q3 2026

Belgium';s regulatory landscape has shifted considerably in recent months, with new obligations taking effect across corporate governance, employment law, taxation, and financial compliance. For international businesses operating in or entering Belgium, understanding these changes is not optional - it is a prerequisite for avoiding penalties and maintaining good standing. This guide covers the most material regulatory developments in Belgium for Q3, explains what they mean in practice, and identifies the steps businesses should take now.

Belgium';s corporate law framework, anchored in the Code des sociétés et des associations (CSA), has seen further implementing measures come into force. The CSA, which replaced the earlier Companies Code and introduced a more flexible regime for private limited companies (BV/SRL) and other entities, continues to generate secondary legislation and clarifying guidance from the Centre belge d';arbitrage et de médiation (CEPANI) and the relevant federal registers.

Recent implementing measures have tightened the requirements around the financial plan that founders must submit when incorporating a BV/SRL. The plan must now demonstrate in greater detail how the company will meet its financial obligations over the first two years of operation. Notaries are applying stricter scrutiny, and companies that submit inadequate plans face delays of several weeks or outright refusal of registration by the Crossroads Bank for Enterprises (CBE/KBO).

A non-obvious requirement that has caught several foreign founders off guard is the obligation to appoint a statutory auditor (réviseur d';entreprises) once a company crosses two of three thresholds: annual turnover above a certain level, balance sheet total above a certain level, or more than fifty employees. Many smaller subsidiaries of international groups assume they are exempt, only to discover mid-year that the thresholds were crossed in the prior financial period. The Institut des Réviseurs d';Entreprises (IRE/IBR) has issued updated guidance on how these thresholds are calculated for groups, which now requires consolidation analysis in certain cases.

In practice, founders should consider commissioning a pre-incorporation financial plan review by a Belgian chartered accountant (expert-comptable/accountant) before approaching the notary. This reduces the risk of delays and ensures the plan meets current notarial expectations.

Employment regulation in Belgium is administered jointly by the Federal Public Service Employment, Labour and Social Dialogue (FPS ELSD) and the National Social Security Office (ONSS/RSZ). Several significant changes have come into effect that affect both domestic and foreign employers with staff in Belgium.

The Act on Workable and Agile Work, which introduced a range of flexible working arrangements, has been supplemented by new collective bargaining agreements (CCTs/CAOs) at the sectoral level. Employers must now ensure that their internal work regulations (règlement de travail/arbeidsreglement) are updated to reflect any applicable sectoral CCT. Failure to update these regulations within the prescribed period - generally within a few months of a new CCT entering into force - can expose employers to administrative fines and, in some cases, individual claims from employees.

The right to disconnect, introduced in earlier legislation for companies with twenty or more employees, has been extended in scope. Employers must now have a written policy on digital disconnection that is formally annexed to the work regulations. The policy must specify the hours during which employees are not expected to respond to professional communications and must identify the exceptional circumstances in which contact outside those hours is permitted. Inspectors from the FPS ELSD have begun auditing compliance with this requirement.

A common mistake among foreign employers is treating Belgian employment law as broadly similar to that of neighbouring jurisdictions. In practice, Belgium';s tripartite system - federal law, sectoral CCTs, and company-level agreements - creates layered obligations that differ significantly by sector. A company in the construction sector, for example, faces a substantially different compliance burden than one in financial services.

The recent reform of the single permit (permis unique/gecombineerde vergunning) procedure for non-EEA workers has also introduced new processing timelines and documentation requirements. Regional immigration authorities - Flanders, Wallonia, and Brussels each administer their own procedures - have updated their checklists, and employers who submit incomplete files now face longer delays before a decision is issued.

If your business is navigating these employment changes and needs support with work regulations, CCT compliance, or permit applications, contact info@vlolawfirm.com. We can assist with documents and filings across all three Belgian regions.

Belgium';s tax framework has seen several developments that international businesses must track. The Federal Public Service Finance (SPF Finances/FOD Financiën) administers corporate income tax, VAT, and withholding taxes, and has issued new administrative circulars and updated its compliance expectations in several areas.

On VAT, Belgium has implemented further measures flowing from EU VAT directives, including adjustments to the rules on place of supply for certain digital and electronically supplied services. Businesses that supply these services to Belgian customers and have not yet registered for VAT in Belgium - or have not opted into the One Stop Shop (OSS) regime - should review their position. The Belgian VAT administration has increased its use of data-matching tools to identify non-compliant suppliers, and the risk of retrospective assessments has grown.

Corporate income tax in Belgium is levied at a standard rate, with a reduced rate available for qualifying small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Recent guidance from the tax administration has clarified the conditions under which the reduced rate applies to subsidiaries of foreign groups. The key issue is whether the subsidiary is genuinely independent in its management and financing, or whether it is effectively controlled in a way that disqualifies it from the reduced rate. Several advance ruling requests on this point have been published by the Service des Décisions Anticipées (SDA/DVB), Belgium';s advance ruling body, providing useful benchmarks.

Transfer pricing continues to be a priority area for the Belgian tax administration. Belgium adopted the OECD';s three-tier documentation framework - master file, local file, and country-by-country report - and the administration has been actively using country-by-country reports to identify groups for audit. Recent audits have focused on intra-group service charges, particularly management fees and intellectual property royalties. Businesses that have not reviewed their transfer pricing documentation in the past two years should treat this as urgent.

A practical scenario: a US-headquartered group with a Belgian operating subsidiary charges a management fee to the Belgian entity for shared services. If the fee is not supported by a contemporaneous local file demonstrating the arm';s length nature of the charge, the Belgian administration may disallow the deduction and impose interest and penalties. The documentation burden is real and should not be deferred.

Belgium';s financial sector is regulated by two principal authorities: the National Bank of Belgium (NBB/BNB), which supervises systemic institutions and payment systems, and the Financial Services and Markets Authority (FSMA/AUTORITÉ DES SERVICES ET MARCHÉS FINANCIERS), which supervises investment firms, insurance intermediaries, and market conduct. Both have issued significant guidance in the current period.

The Anti-Money Laundering (AML) framework in Belgium is governed by the Law of 18 September 2017 on the prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing. Recent amendments and supervisory guidance have strengthened the requirements for customer due diligence (CDD), particularly for politically exposed persons (PEPs) and for transactions involving certain high-risk jurisdictions. Obliged entities - which include not only financial institutions but also accountants, lawyers, notaries, and real estate agents - must ensure their CDD procedures are updated to reflect the current risk-based approach.

The FSMA has also updated its expectations around product governance for investment firms distributing financial instruments to retail clients. Firms must demonstrate that their target market assessments are reviewed at least annually and that distribution strategies remain aligned with the characteristics and needs of the identified target market. This is a direct implementation of MiFID II product governance requirements, but the FSMA has added Belgian-specific guidance on how the review process should be documented.

A common mistake among smaller investment firms and intermediaries is treating product governance as a one-time exercise at product launch. In practice, the FSMA expects ongoing monitoring, and firms that cannot produce evidence of annual reviews are at risk of supervisory action, including public warnings and fines.

The NBB has also issued updated guidance on operational resilience for payment institutions and electronic money institutions. Firms in this category must now map their critical functions and services, identify concentration risks in their outsourcing arrangements, and test their recovery capabilities. The guidance aligns with the EU';s Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA), which has direct effect in Belgium and applies to a broad range of financial entities.

Belgium';s data protection authority, the Autorité de protection des données (APD/GBA), has maintained an active enforcement posture. The APD has jurisdiction over GDPR compliance in Belgium and has issued several notable decisions in the current period, including decisions on cookie consent, data retention, and the use of personal data for direct marketing purposes.

Recent APD decisions have reinforced that cookie walls - mechanisms that deny access to a website unless the user consents to non-essential cookies - are not compliant with GDPR as interpreted in Belgium. Businesses operating Belgian-facing websites that use cookie walls should review their consent mechanisms urgently. The APD has shown willingness to impose fines that are proportionate to the size of the organisation and the severity of the infringement.

On direct marketing, the APD has clarified its position on the use of legitimate interest as a legal basis for processing personal data for marketing purposes. The authority takes a restrictive view: legitimate interest is not a blanket justification, and businesses must conduct and document a genuine balancing test that weighs their interest against the rights and expectations of the data subjects. Many businesses have relied on legitimate interest without conducting this test, which creates significant enforcement risk.

The EU';s Digital Services Act (DSA) and Digital Markets Act (DMA) have direct effect in Belgium and impose obligations on platforms and intermediary service providers. While the largest platforms are designated as Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) and subject to the most stringent obligations, smaller providers must also comply with baseline transparency and notice-and-action requirements. Belgian businesses that operate online platforms - even at a modest scale - should assess whether they fall within the scope of the DSA and what obligations apply to them.

A practical scenario: a Belgian e-commerce operator runs a marketplace connecting third-party sellers with consumers. Under the DSA, this operator has obligations to provide transparent information about the parameters of recommendation systems, to maintain a complaints mechanism, and to cooperate with trusted flaggers. Failure to implement these mechanisms exposes the operator to enforcement action by the competent Digital Services Coordinator, which in Belgium is the Institut belge des services postaux et des télécommunications (IBPT/BIPT).

For businesses that need to assess their GDPR and digital regulation exposure and implement compliant frameworks, contact info@vlolawfirm.com. We can help structure the setup correctly the first time.

The cumulative effect of these regulatory changes is significant for international businesses with Belgian operations. Several cross-cutting themes emerge that deserve particular attention.

First, the layered nature of Belgian regulation - federal, regional, and EU-level - means that compliance cannot be managed from a single vantage point. A business that is compliant at the federal level may still face regional obligations, particularly in employment and immigration, that require separate attention in Flanders, Wallonia, and Brussels-Capital.

Second, the increasing use of data-driven enforcement by Belgian authorities - the tax administration';s use of country-by-country reports, the APD';s monitoring of websites, and the FSMA';s data-matching capabilities - means that non-compliance is more likely to be detected than in earlier periods. Businesses that have relied on low enforcement probability as a de facto compliance strategy should reconsider that approach.

Third, the interaction between Belgian law and EU-level regulation is becoming more complex. DORA, the DSA, the DMA, and ongoing VAT harmonisation measures all have direct effect in Belgium, but Belgian authorities have added national-level guidance and expectations that go beyond the minimum requirements of the EU instruments. Understanding both layers is essential.

In practice, founders and compliance officers should consider conducting a structured regulatory mapping exercise at least once per year, covering all applicable federal, regional, and EU obligations. This exercise should identify gaps, assign ownership, and set remediation timelines.

Many underestimate the cost of reactive compliance - that is, addressing regulatory issues only after they are identified by an authority. Proactive compliance, while requiring upfront investment in legal and advisory services, is almost always less expensive than managing an audit, investigation, or enforcement action.

---

What are the most common compliance failures by foreign businesses in Belgium?

Foreign businesses most frequently fail in three areas: employment law compliance (particularly the obligation to update work regulations following new sectoral CCTs), VAT registration for digital services, and transfer pricing documentation. Belgium';s tripartite employment system is genuinely different from most other European jurisdictions, and businesses that apply the rules of their home country often find themselves non-compliant. On VAT, the Belgian administration has become more active in identifying unregistered foreign suppliers. On transfer pricing, the absence of contemporaneous documentation is the most common audit finding, and it is one that is entirely avoidable with proper planning.

How long does it typically take to remediate a compliance gap identified by a Belgian authority?

The timeline depends heavily on the nature of the gap and the authority involved. For employment law issues - such as an outdated work regulation - remediation can often be completed within a few weeks, provided the employer acts promptly and engages the relevant employee representative bodies. For tax issues, particularly transfer pricing, remediation may take several months, as it involves preparing or updating documentation, potentially engaging with the advance ruling body, and in some cases negotiating with the administration. For AML deficiencies, the NBB and FSMA typically set remediation deadlines in their supervisory correspondence, and failure to meet those deadlines can result in escalating sanctions. Early engagement with the relevant authority, supported by legal counsel, generally produces better outcomes than delay.

Should a foreign business consider restructuring its Belgian operations in light of these regulatory changes?

Restructuring is rarely the first response to regulatory change, but it may be appropriate in specific circumstances. For example, a foreign group that operates in Belgium through a branch rather than a subsidiary may find that the branch structure creates disproportionate compliance complexity, particularly for VAT and employment purposes. Equally, a group that has grown organically in Belgium and now crosses the statutory auditor thresholds may benefit from reviewing its corporate structure to ensure it is fit for purpose. The decision to restructure should be driven by a holistic analysis of tax, legal, and operational factors, not by a single regulatory change. Professional advice is essential before any restructuring is initiated, as Belgian corporate law imposes specific procedures and timelines for mergers, demergers, and conversions.

---

Belgium';s regulatory environment in Q3 reflects a broader trend across the EU: higher compliance expectations, more active enforcement, and increasing complexity at the intersection of national and EU-level rules. For international businesses, the practical imperative is to treat Belgian compliance as a continuous process rather than a periodic exercise. The changes in corporate governance, employment law, taxation, financial services regulation, and data protection described in this guide each carry real consequences for non-compliance, and the Belgian authorities have demonstrated both the tools and the willingness to act.

VLO Law Firms advises international clients on regulatory compliance and legal structuring in Belgium. We can assist with corporate governance reviews, employment law compliance, transfer pricing documentation, AML framework implementation, and GDPR assessments. To request a consultation, contact: info@vlolawfirm.com