A new minimum remuneration requirement

The Summer Agreement, partially translated into the Corporation Tax Reform Act of 25 December 2017 (published in the Belgian Official Gazette of 29 December 2017) introduces a reduced corporation tax rate that falls to 25% by tax year 2021. Under certain conditions, a small company can even benefit from a reduced rate of 20% on its first tranche of € 100,000 of taxable revenue. However, the reduction in the corporation tax rate also involves a number of compensatory measures, including a tax penalty for companies that do not meet a new minimum remuneration requirement. Below, we take a look at the requirement of the minimum remuneration that companies are now obliged to pay out.

In order to discourage the setting up of companies for purely tax reasons and to prevent companies that generate sufficient profit from compensating the natural persons active within the company solely through dividends, art. 219d of the Income Tax Act ("WIB") imposes minimum management remuneration provisions. The minimum remuneration is € 45,000 or if the taxable result is less, compensation that is at least equal to the taxable result of the company. This minimum remuneration must be awarded to at least one of its business managers (being natural persons).

For affiliated companies of which at least half of the business managers are the same persons in each of these companies, the aggregate of the remuneration paid by these companies to one of the same persons may be taken into account in order to determine the amount of the remuneration. In that case, the total amount of the minimum remuneration is raised to € 75,000.

The sanction for non-compliance is a separate assessment of 5% (tax years 2019 and 2020) or 10% (from tax year 2021) on the difference between the minimum remuneration and the highest remuneration awarded by the company to one of its business managers.

In favour of or to the detriment of the taxpayer?

The question can be asked whether the new rules are ultimately in favour of or to the detriment of the taxpayer. The answer to that question will depend on the concrete set of facts and whether the remuneration of the business manager is increased or not to avoid the penalty for the shortage of minimum remuneration. In order to answer this question correctly, account must be taken of, inter alia:

  • the level of the current remuneration (and the rate scale in which it is taxed),
  • the social security contributions,
  • the municipal tax,
  • whether the company is subject to the reduced, rising rate,
  • whether or not the business manager receives only professional income,
  • whether the business manager is married or not (applying the marriage quotient),
  • etc.

In short, a whole series of factors that can each take effect.

To the extent that the profits of the company exceed € 45,000 and the existing remuneration (lower than € 45,000) is not increased to avoid the sanction, it is certain that the total bill will often be more disadvantageous for the tax years 2019 and 2020. From tax year 2021 onwards, the scheme may become more advantageous mainly due to the further fall in the rate of corporation tax.

To the extent that the remuneration is raised to the minimum of € 45,000 or already amounts to at least € 45,000, different hypotheses show that the new scheme is often generally more profitable overall. The decrease in the corporation tax due generally compensates for the additional costs resulting from the increase of the remuneration. The company can therefore indeed compensate the tax disadvantage for the tax years 2019 and 2020 by increasing the remuneration of the business manager to the required statutory minimum.

We would also like to point out that this separate assessment will not be applicable for small companies during the first four financial years from the moment they are set up if the business manager is not remunerated sufficiently.

This is a measure that goes beyond merely providing a condition for enjoying the reduced rate for small companies. As mentioned above, this sanction applies to all companies (both small and others) that do not or do not adequately compensate their business managers.

 

Is there a notification requirement for your organisation?
Well begun is half done: Prepare your organisation for the go-live of the UBO register.
The register of ultimate beneficiaries (the "UBO register") will go live on 31 October 2018. In one of our previous newsletters we presented an overview of the general framework of the UBO register. The Royal Decree of 30 July 2018, published in the Belgian Official Journal of 14 September 2018, explains this register in detail. We’ve reviewed what your organisation needs to take into account.&n
One of the action points of the ATAD Directive
Impact of the implementation of the Belgian CFC legislation: the de facto tightening of transfer pricing rules?
From 1 January 2019 (fiscal year 2020), the newly introduced CFC rule will come into effect in Belgium, due to the implementation of the ATAD directive1. This new legislation must be interpreted within the broader framework of the Summer Agreement and the reforms within Belgian corporate taxation, which, like the CFC legislation, have resulted in part from the heavily discussed implementation of t
Brexit, e-commerce & VAT action plan are discussed
Pending changes in the area of international VAT
In the previous edition we discussed the expected changes in terms of VAT at a national level. In this article we will briefly consider the VAT changes that are expected internationally.                Brexit  In principle, on 30 March 2019, the ‘Brexit’ will finally be a reality. The United Kingdom will no lon
Limited number of legal entity types
Help, soon my legal entity type will no longer exist!
The WVV ("CAC") is on its way On 4 June 2018, the "draft legislation introducing the Companies and Associations Code" was filed in the Chamber, marking one of the most far-reaching corporate law reforms since the introduction of the coordinated laws on commercial companies on 30 November 1935. This extensive reform of corporate law corresponds with the introduction of the “Companies and Asso
A brief summary
What should be expected in relation to (national) VAT?
Despite the fact that many of us are still in summer (holiday) mode, this article is going to focus on the VAT changes that we could expect in the not-too-distant future. It will provide a brief summary. For a more in-depth examination, you can always contact our VAT team.  Vouchers (1 January 2019)  In June 2016, Europe set out the VAT process for vouchers (Directive (EU)2016/1065 o
The FAQ contains no fewer than thirty-one questions
FAQ published regarding the Innovation Income Deduction (IID)
On 26 July 2018, the FPS Finance used Fisconet - you can registrate for free to consult the list of FAQ - to publish the long-awaited list of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) regarding the Innovation Income Deduction. Since the law of 9 February 2017, introducing the Innovation Income Deduction, there now follows the first additional comments concerning the legal provisions of Art. 20
Depends on the nature and frequency of the violation
Fine levels set for non-compliance with transfer pricing documentation obligation
From tax year 2017 and, more specifically, the implementation of the mandatory transfer pricing documentation obligation, there was an immediate indication that, from a second violation of non-compliance with the transfer pricing obligations, a fine of between 1,250 EUR and 25,000 EUR (Article 445, §3 Income Tax Code 1992) could be imposed. The scales of the administrative fines and their appl
What are the consequences?
Vlabel overruled by the Council of State in the case of split acquisition and registration of bare ownership and usufruct
After years of dispute between taxpayers and the Flemish Tax Office (Vlabel), the Council of State has quashed Vlabel's position on split acquisition and split registration. Here below we explain where the problem lies and what the consequences of the decision of the Council of State are in practice. The problematic situations Two kinds of situations were targeted by the position of Vlabel. Th
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

Subscribe to our newsletter