This is the first blog of our amazing intern Ms Amelie Chetrit.
Amélie is a student-at-law at the Paris Bar, graduating top of her class with a master's degree in Business Litigation Law at the University of Sorbonne in Paris. Her academic and professional experiences have honed her focus on corporate criminal law, particularly stock market and tax litigation involving international companies. She has gained practical experience through internships at renowned law firms in Paris and with Transparency International, an NGO specializing in the fight against corruption. Notably, she has completed several internships in jurisdictions specializing in business criminal law and tax fraud with judges, prosecutors, and investigating judges. Her expertise extends to investigations before the National Financial Prosecutor's Office (PNF), and she has a keen interest in the emerging legal landscape of cryptocurrency taxation. Following her internship at @O2K, Amélie will join Vey & Associés, a French leading law firm specializing in criminal defense and white-collar crime.
Didier Dablemont’s (Senior Private Banker - Banque Privée Edmond de Rothschild Europe) latest LinkedIn post discusses a 10% capital gains tax, also applicable to crypto-currencies. This would see Belgium lose its status as a tax haven for crypto investors. The original article in French was written by Mr Philippe Galloy from L’Écho.
TOWARDS THE END OF BELGIUM’S TAX HAVEN FOR CRYPTO-INVESTORS
Are Belgian cryptocurrency investors finally getting burned? That could well be the case, according to the latest “super-note” from current Prime Minister Bart De Wever (drawn up when he was the federal government’s formator) and its accompanying budget tables. Indeed, it includes a solidarity contribution, in the form of a 5% tax on capital gains on financial assets. This includes cryptoassets. In detail, the tax would apply only to realised capital gains (including sales), would not be retroactive, and historical capital gains would be exempt. Capital losses could be deducted in the same year, but could not be carried forward (so it would be impossible to deduct a capital loss from 2006 against a capital gain from 2027, for example). There are also plans to exempt the first €10,000 of capital gains per year (this amount has yet to be confirmed).
The end of the Belgian tax haven
This new contribution would put an end to Belgium’s status as a “tax haven” for individual investors. As far as crypto-currencies are concerned (treated for tax purposes in the same way as shares), the level of taxation is currently 0%, at least in the context of the “normal management of private assets”. This is the rate that would rise to 5% if Bart De Wever’s “super-note” sees the light of day.
The other types of tax currently applicable in Belgium on cryptocurrency capital gains would remain unchanged. These are the 33% tax on miscellaneous income, which relates to speculative investments (even if some people think that there will only be professional rate in combination with this new 10%), and the progressive taxation (up to 50%) of professional income when the crypto investment actually constitutes the taxpayer’s professional activity.
By way of comparison, France already taxes crypto capital gains at 30% (with an exemption below €305), while Germany and Luxembourg. Germany and Luxembourg also exempt capital gains on cryptos held for more than a year and six months respectively. In Europe, according to Switzerland, Malta and Cyprus do not tax individual cryptocurrency capital gains at all.
Cryptoassets finally legitimate?
According to lawyers specialising in cryptocurrency taxation, Arizona’s proposed tax would have the merit of providing clarity to investors about the levels of taxation to which they may be subject. “This could provide legal certainty, as the current situation is mainly a matter for tax experts, who have to examine taxpayers’ situations on a case-by-case basis to determine whether they should be subject to these taxes”, explains Florian Ernotte (Avroy Avocats). But there is a difference of opinion. Other professionals think it doesn’t provide much more clarity if the “miscellaneous income” remains because the difference for the tax payer will be huge if it remains (10% versus 33%).
However, he stresses the uncertainty surrounding the “miscellaneous income” tax applied to speculation, the distinction between which and the “normal management of private assets” remains largely at the discretion of the tax authorities. Baptistin Alaime (Tuerlinckx Tax Lawyers) agrees. “The problem with the crypto tax regime at the moment is that there is a lot of uncertainty. It is very difficult to calculate what needs to be declared and to comply with one’s tax obligations…”. On the other hand, notes the tax lawyer, “as soon as they are taxed, cryptos will become legitimate in a way”.
Towards automatic reporting
Another sensitive point is the declaration of these cryptoassets. The tax authorities will only be able to tax capital gains on bitcoin and other digital currencies if they are aware of their existence. “The law today requires you to declare (to the central contact point of the National Bank) your accounts in foreign financial institutions”, points out Maître Florian Ernotte, who believes that cryptos do not fall within this definition, apart from those held via a bank, such as Revolut for example.
For his part, Baptistin Alaime follows the approach of Finance Minister Vincent Van Peteghem, “who believes that cryptos that all foreign accounts, of any kind, must be declared”, including crypto accounts. “Our firm considers that crypto accounts on exchange platforms such as Binance fall within this framework. We need to be as transparent as possible”, says the tax expert.
The National Bank’s position on this debate is that accounts must be declared only if they are held “with a foreign banking, foreign exchange, credit or savings institution”, leaving room for interpretation.
The 33% tax on “miscellaneous income”, which relates in particular to speculative investments in cryptocurrencies, would continue to apply.
Anticipating the European directive
On the other hand, lawyers agree that the European DAC8 Directive, which has yet to be transposed into Belgian law (by 2026 at the earliest), will bring greater clarity. It will require crypto platforms to transfer customer data automatically to the tax authorities. Bart De Wever’s “super-note” and his taxation of crypto capital gains could be an anticipation of this regulation, which will offer more transparency on taxpayers’ crypto assets. And in any case, as Baptistin Alaime points out, “the banks also ask whether these crypto accounts have been declared when there is an attempt to repatriate them” by their holders.
It remains to be seen whether the 5% tax will not be increased to 10 or 15% depending on budgetary needs, according to Baptistin Alaime. “This is an initial tax on capital gains and once the door is open, it will be very easy to raise the rate”.
The challenges of implementation
Introducing a 5% tax on cryptocurrency capital gains might appear straightforward, but its practical application poses challenges. One key issue is valuation—crypto prices are highly volatile, and determining a fair market value at the time of sale could lead to disputes. Additionally, calculating the original purchase price (or cost basis) becomes complex for frequent traders or those who’ve used multiple platforms.
Tax evasion is another concern. Although the European DAC8 Directive will require crypto platforms to report user data, decentralized exchanges and self-custody wallets may still fall outside these reporting frameworks. Tighter regulations or new mechanisms may be needed to ensure compliance.
Balancing innovation and regulation
Belgium’s proposal underscores the difficulty of balancing fair taxation with fostering innovation. Over-regulation could drive investors and crypto startups to friendlier jurisdictions like Switzerland or Malta, potentially weakening Belgium’s competitiveness. To strike the right balance, the government must ensure the system remains predictable, transparent, and fair for both individual investors and businesses in the blockchain sector.
Looking ahead
The proposed 5% tax on crypto capital gains represents a turning point in Belgium’s treatment of digital assets, marking an end to its reputation as a tax haven. For investors, this measure brings legitimacy and clarity but also increased responsibility for compliance. The reform aligns with broader European trends toward crypto regulation and transparency, though questions remain about its long-term impact. Whether this new tax evolves into a broader framework or remains an isolated initiative, it signals Belgium’s commitment to adapting its policies to the realities of digital finance.
*Side note by Mrs Antonia Eilander MA LLM, Founder of @O2K and Crypto Tax Forum: For more information on how crypto assets are taxed in the Netherlands please read this article from the Dutch Chamber of Commerce. Moreover, please note that DAC 8 and OECD CARF will enable tax authorities by providing them with a lot of (exchanged) information. However, that information is only obtained from centralized exchanges (e.g.Binance) and (neo)banks such as Revolut. Decentralized exchanges and coldwallets are still difficult to trace. Therefore, tax evasion could still occur.
For more information related to international taxation and regulation of crypto assets please refer to our previous blogs, webinars and conferences. We look forward to welcoming you to our 2025 edition to the conference. For more information, please visit our website www.cryptotaxforum.org. For bi-weekly crypto tax and regulation news worldwide, please subscribe to our newsletter by sending an email to cryptotaxforum@o2k.tech.
.svg){kind=icon}
.jpg)
