Bill proposing that inheritance law be reformed: what can we expect?

Belgian inheritance law, which is still largely derived from the 1804 Napoleonic Code, is ripe for a comprehensive overhaul. And so the demand for a new and modernised law of inheritance that is more in equilibrium with the needs of contemporary society has existed for quite some time. On 25 January 2017 a new bill was introduced in parliament, which entails amending the Civil Code insofar as inheritances and gifts are concerned as well as the amendment of a range of other relevant provisions. This bill tackles the problems that the practice is faced with as a result of the current form of inheritance law, using four major themes: amending the rules for a reserve for compulsory heirs under the law of inheritance, amending the rules for gifts that must be brought back into the estate, relaxing the current prohibition on agreements concerning the estates of persons not yet deceased and adapting the rules on the division of an estate. 

1. Inheritance agreements

In the current inheritance law there is a prohibition on concluding agreements for the estates of persons not yet deceased. There are however a number of legal exceptions to this ban, such as the so-called “Valkeniers clause” (which allows spouses to waive their right of inheritance to each other’s estates in the marriage contract if they have children from a previous relationship).The bill aims to relax this prohibition and tries to tackle the concern many parents are faced with when arranging their estates, both for themselves and in consultation with future beneficiaries. The bill does this by introducing the concept of the ‘general inheritance agreement’, which gives parents the opportunity to reach agreements with their children on the allocation and division of their estates. This gives the parents peace of mind and reduces the chance of arguments erupting between the children when their parents die.Aside from this ‘general inheritance agreement’, the bill likewise calls for the introduction of a number of ‘punctual inheritance agreements’, which provide for the opportunity, among other things, to conclude an inheritance agreement on the value of gifted items in respect of gifts that must be brought back into the estate, compulsory heirs relinquishing an abatement claim, or permission by the compulsory heirs for a donee to dispose of goods gifted to him or her.

2. The compulsory reserve under the law of inheritance


The bill includes another ‘revolutionary’ aspect – an overhaul of the portion of an inheritance that must be reserved for children under the inheritance law. This general reserve for offspring shall be reduced to half of the estate, with the direct consequence that the available part of the estate will also be half. At present the size of the available portion is still dependent on the number of children – if there is one child the available portion is half, if there are two children it is a third and for three or more children the available portion is just one quarter of the estate. So it is primarily the parents of two or more children that will henceforth have more options when it comes to distributing their estates. Bearing in mind specific family situations, the parents can settle their estates more according to their wishes. Of primary concern here are families with step-children, children requiring special care, protection for a partner to whom that person is not married, etc.

The ‘shrinking’ of that reserve set aside for the children is to some extent offset in the bill by means of reduced burden on the reserve as a result of the right of usufruct of the spouse living the longest. While in theory the longest-living spouse retains the right of usufruct to the entire estate, if that person is only entitled to the usufruct to a part of the estate, then it is preferentially charged to the available portion.

The bill further discusses the repeal of the reserve set aside for parents. At present a childless testator whose parents are still alive cannot choose to whom his or her assets will be transferred, because a reserve of one quarter of the estate is set aside for each parent. This reserve would be repealed under the new law and replaced by a claim for maintenance payable out of the childless testator’s estate. A parent can lodge a claim for maintenance if he or she is in need thereof at the time of the child’s death and receive it in the form of an annuity or in capital.

The children – the compulsory heirs – are entitled to a ‘reserve in kind’ at present. Should the reserved portion of the estate for the children be breached because the testator made too many gifts during his or her lifetime, the children can demand that those goods gifted in kind be returned to the estate (= abatement). It comes as no surprise that this situation creates a great deal of uncertainty, especially for the donees of donations that are suddenly required to surrender the goods they received. This is why that reserve in kind is to be converted into a ‘reserve in value’. This means that the compulsory heirs will only be able to demand the countervalue of the donations that have depleted their reserve, but not the gifted goods themselves.

The valuation of the donations for the purpose of calculating the notional total value of an estate (for the purpose of the abatement of donations, where applicable) will, under the bill, henceforth be based on the intrinsic value of the gifts on the day upon which they were donated, indexed until the date of the testator’s death. At present this valuation is conducted on the date of the testator’s death. By valuing donations for the purpose of calculating the notional total value of an estate at the time of the donation, admittedly with indexation, a uniformity is created in respect of valuing donations for the purpose of determining their part of the estate (gifts brought in – see below).

3. Gifts brought in


The mechanism for gifts received before the testator’s death that are considered as part of the estate (gifts brought in) is likewise the subject of a comprehensive overhaul. Gifts brought in are gifts (or their countervalue) that a legal heir received while the testator was alive or through a testament and that are brought back into the estate as a whole at the time of the testator’s death. By doing so, the items brought in are divided between all beneficiaries, guaranteeing their equality. This is because it is presumed that the gifts to the legal heir were made by the testator as an advance payment on their share in the estate, as it were. In other words, the testator was merely of the intention of awarding an advance to the donee of what he or she would receive at the time of the liquidation and distribution of the estate. That is why the donee returns this gift – or its countervalue – to the estate, after which it shall be divided up among the heirs.

At present this bringing in of gifts is performed according to whether moveable or immoveable assets are involved. As a rule, immoveable assets are brought in in kind and according to their value on the date the estate is distributed, while moveable goods are dealt with by means of a reduced share (in terms of value) and according to the value at the time of being donated. In practice, this distinction means that many unreasonable and unfair situations are created. The bill deals with this by determining that all items, whether moveable or immoveable, shall be brought in in the same manner – in terms of their value, irrespective of their nature, and on the basis of the intrinsic value of the gifted items on the date they are donated, indexed until the date of the testator’s death. Both the abatement and the bringing in of donations will henceforth be performed in a uniform manner.  

4. Apportioning debts


Finally, the bill also provides for a clearer arrangement for apportioning debts. The Civil Code presently only dictates the principle for bringing in debts, but says nothing of the methods. This is why a new article 821 of the Civil Code has been proposed, which includes a new arrangement for apportioning debts.

Property planning finds itself in turbulent waters
Valuation of a usufruct: in complete (r)evolution?
Much has been said and written in the past few years about the valuation of a usufruct and where the fiscal shoe pinches. An overview of valuation problems, current trends and a look at future property planning is provided below. Valuation of a usufruct Valuation of a usufruct: a changing world Usufruct is one of the oldest property rights known and was already applied in Roman times. Usufr
This difference in treatment needs to be corrected
Benefit in kind on immovable property: tax authority abides by the court ruling (for now)
The Federal Public Service Finance published Circular 2018/C/57 on 15 May 2018 on the flat-rate valuation of the benefit in kind for providing an immovable property or a part of an immovable property free of charge to employees or managers. The flat-rate estimate of these benefits is laid down by the Royal Decree implementing the Income Tax Code 1992 (RD/BITC 92). The Courts of Appeal of Ghent and
The 'use and enjoyment" rules explained
Freight transport and closely associated services: new rules clarified in a circular
On 31 October 2017, (previous) Royal Decree No 57, which deals with the freight transport services Department and related services, was replaced by a new RD which came into force on 23 November 2017. It clarifies the former RD in part while introducing a new rule. In order to clarify and discuss the (new) rules, the tax authorities published an administrative circular in this regard on 31 May 2018
Guidelines
Substantial changes in the obligations for partnerships
The Company Law Reform, published on 27 April 2018, is making a number of changes in the Companies Code and the Code of Economic Law. These new regulations will enter into force on 1 November 2018. A few rules will also change for partnerships. Although some clarifications will still be published, we would already like to provide the following guidelines. Changes in the Companies Code A first
Quickly detect system risks
Without a Legal Entity Identifier your company will not be trading on the stock market in 2018
  As from 3 January 2018, every legal entity that buys or sells financial instruments must have a Legal Entity Identifier or LEI. Legal Entity Identifier A LEI is a 20-digit alpha-numeric code enabling quick identification of legal entities that are active on the (international or local) financial markets. The LEI enables regulators to quickly detect system risks. Registrati
A summary of the main points
Immovable property leases to include VAT
  Although currently there is just a draft bill on this issue, which obviously can be subject to change in the meantime, we would like to summarize the main points of the upcoming revolution in the VAT landscape: immovable property leases may become subject to VAT. History Until recently, immovable property leases have – in principle – been exempt from VAT (section 44, paragr
UBO = Ultimate Beneficial Owner
The UBO register: new disclosure requirements planned for your company’s administrative body
As a result of the insertion of sections 14(1) and 14(2) into the Belgian Companies Code all companies must in the future obtain adequate, accurate and current information about their ‘ultimate beneficial owners’ (UBOs) and record the data in the new ‘UBO Register’, a central register containing data about companies and the natural persons behind them. In view of the unwavering atte
Introduction of the matrimonial property law
Is it the end of the final set-off clause or is it getting new life?
  Much has been said about the final set-off clause in recent years. After the Court of Cassation in 2017 ruled in favour of the tax payer that the claim was deductible in the scope of the payable succession duties, the Flemish regulator decided to come to the aid of the tax authorities by changing the law. What is a final set-off clause and how does it work? Many spouses married un
Also the unequal treatment gets reviewed
Benefit in kind for housing: how to anticipate the higher or lower scenario?
Discrimination as regards the benefit in kind for housing has been highlighted on several occasions. Specifically, it relates to the unequal treatment of the same benefits, whether in terms of provision by a sole trader or provision by a legal person. In the most common cases, the benefit arising from being a limited company is almost four times more expensive taxation-wise than the benefit arisin
To reduce the financial burden
Start-up reduction on social security contributions for self-employed persons
The start-up reduction was part of the 'Summer agreement' and took effect on 1 April 2018. With this initiative, the government intends to reduce the financial burden of self-employed persons in start-ups, who often have low incomes at the start of their activity, thereby stimulating entrepreneurship.  Which self-employed persons are eligible?  The reduction measure applies to all se

Subscribe to our newsletter