A new compensation obligation in the legal system

What if a spouse practices his profession in a company whose shares all form part of his separate property?

The Act of 22 July 2018 has introduced considerable changes to matrimonial property law. This article addresses a specific addition to that law, namely the possible disadvantage incurred by the matrimonial property when a spouse practices their profession through their own company1.  

What is it about?
The new rule is in the interest only of people who are married under the community property regime, in which case the capital is divided into three parts: the ‘separate’ capital, i.e. that of each of the spouses, and the community property capital. In the event of a divorce, a financial settlement is required between those three capitals if either capital has been enriched at the expense of another. For instance, if the community capital has funded works on a spouse’s separate property, that spouse’s capital has increased, whereas the community capital has decreased. In a divorce, these gains and losses are settled through the so-called compensation accounts (in Dutch: ‘vergoedingsrekeningen’): the enriched capital will have to compensate the decreased capital, thus restoring the balance between the spouses’ capitals.

Now, if the shares in a company are the separate property of a spouse who practices his profession in that company, the income generated by the company will not be paid out. Although the shares increase in value, no compensation is required – after all: no other capital decreased to realise the share value increase. This means that if the marriage ends in divorce, the spouse is allowed to keep the value increase without compensating the other spouse.

Section 1405, par. 1(1) of the Belgian Civil Code provides that in the legal system, the professional income belongs to the matrimonial property. In our example, the spouse’s labour gives rise to income that does not become part of the matrimonial property, but instead remains part of the spouse’s own company. The matrimonial property thus incurs a disadvantage as a result of the spouse practicing his profession through a company. In that scenario, it is possible that the spouse who owns the shares does not contribute to the matrimonial property, as he hoards his professional income in his company. The new section 1432(2) of the Belgian Civil Code seeks to remedy such situation. 

How does the new mechanism work?
A distinction must be made between shares in a professional company acquired with matrimonial property funds and those purchased with separate funds.

Shares acquired with matrimonial property funds
Section 1401, par. 1 (5) of the Belgian Civil Code provides that if the acquisition of shares in a professional company was funded with matrimonial property funds, the membership rights associated with those shares form part of the spouse’s separate capital if the enterprise is the professional company of that spouse, or if the spouse is crucial to the company (which will be reflected in the restrictions as regards share transfer).

However, based on section 1405, par. 1(5), the asset value of the related shares forms part of the matrimonial property. The law thus makes a clear distinction between ‘title’ (membership rights) and ‘finance’ (asset value). If said spouse ‘parks’ his professional income in his company, the matrimonial property does not incur a disadvantage in the longer term, as the value of those shares forms part of that matrimonial property. Consequently, no settlement between accounts is required.

Shares acquired with separate funds
However, shares in the professional company will form part of the spouse’s separate capital if said spouse acquired them before the marriage, or if he purchased them during the marriage with his separate funds or obtained them during the marriage through inheritance or donation. Section 1432(2) of the Belgian Civil Code was created specifically in view of these shares that belong to a spouse’s separate capital. For if this spouse pays himself only a minor fee for his performance in his own company, the matrimonial property will indeed incur a disadvantage. After all, the matrimonial property does not receive the higher income it would reasonably have obtained had the spouse practiced his profession as a self-employed person or as an employee. Furthermore, the own company will be able to reserve or capitalise the remainder of the realised profit, as a result of which the value of the shares and hence the separate capital of this spouse practicing his profession in the company, will increase.

For this reason, section 1432(2) of the Belgian Civil Code provides that if the matrimonial property incurs a disadvantage as illustrated above, it should be compensated for the net professional income it missed out on and which ‘in fairness’ it could have obtained had the profession not been practiced through a spouse’s own company. The related claim for compensation may be brought by the other spouse at the time of the divorce. It will not constitute the total share value increase, but only compensate for the income missed out on by the matrimonial property. In his defence, the spouse practicing his profession in the company may plead against said claim by demonstrating that payment of a higher or normal fee was not appropriate for various reasons, e.g. the financial situation of the company due to heavy losses or investments, a slow market, economic circumstances or reasons of competition, etc. Such defence must be supported by the necessary documents. In a more complex situation where parties fail to reach an agreement, an expert will be appointed.

Please note: practicing a profession through one’s own company should not always be considered a negative factor in relation to the matrimonial property. A company often brings advantages to the matrimonial property. Examples include the (family) home purchased by the company, for which the family need not pay rent, and the purchase of a car via the company.  

Timetable of application
The above compensation rule applies to spouses married after September 1, 2018. Spouses married before this date can only claim compensation for any income ‘lost’ after September 1, 2018. Any income lost before that date cannot be recovered based on the new section 1432(2) of the Belgian Civil Code. 

[1] Section 1432(2) of the Belgian Civil Code

The requirement to register gets a broader scope
More entrepreneurs must register with the Crossroads Bank for Enterprises (CBE)
Under the aim of creating a more attractive business climate, changes were made to the existing company law. In that context, the legislator has done away with the ‘trader’ concept, replacing it with the umbrella term ‘enterprise. Besides forming the basis for the rules of the Code of Economic Law, the Judicial Code and the Civil Code, the new enterprise concept also has consequences for reg
Changes in the cary proxy and usufruct
Estate planning: recent developments
Over the last few months, we have regularly reported on the important changes in estate planning and inheritance planning. Below is an update of some of those changes.   The care proxy: secure your estate for later The classic example is a person who, due to a physical or mental limitation (e.g. coma, dementia), is – temporarily or permanently – unable to manage their assets properly.
Happy Brexmas?
How to prepare your company for Brexit?
On 10 December 2018, the British Prime Minister decided to postpone the vote on the Brexit deal in the House of Commons. The risk of a ‘no deal’ disaster scenario is increasing. What are the important dates? On 29 March 2017, the United Kingdom formally informed the European Council of its intention to leave the EU (according to the procedure provided in Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty). C
A popular control structure
The all-powerful manager of a civil-law partnership: was it always a fiction?
The civil-law partnership has long been a popular control structure among wealth planners. In many cases, donors do not want to give up their assets entirely, and still want to retain some control over what they donate. Definitely in cases of transfers of family companies, the donors (often parents or family members) still want to retain control over the course of the business.  The advant
The tax framework
Company subsidies: exempted or not?
Various subsidies were briefly described in the article by our colleagues from Strategy and Operations. They explained that they can assist you and your company with guidance on subsidies, from A to Z.1 In this context, we would like to discuss the tax framework for subsidies: how are awarded subsidies treated tax-wise within companies? Are these subsidies exempt from corporation tax and, if
Right to deduct VAT possible for costs incurred during the purchase of shares
The Ryanair ruling
Right to deduct VAT also possible for costs incurred during the purchase of shares, if the purchase ultimately does not (fully) go ahead The European Court of Justice recently confirmed that VAT on costs incurred during the purchase of shares may be deductible even if the purchase ultimately does not (fully) go ahead. As such, the Court of Justice has upheld the principle that the preparatory t
What are the options?
The deduction for investment: an illustration of the options
The deduction for investment allows companies and natural persons who earn profits or benefits to reduce their taxable profits by placing part of the acquisition or investment value of investments in new tangible and intangible fixed assets. Depending on the size of your business and the nature of your activities, you can generally apply the regular, one-off deduction for investment of 20% (tem
Valuation of usufruct
Now also a witch hunt when usufruct is sold?
In previous editions, we have already written about the valuation of usufruct when purchasing property, but recently there have also been regular reports of checks on the valuation of usufruct when reselling. However, up until now, the case law has followed the viewpoint of the taxpayer. Brief description For several years, there has been a lot of controversy regarding the valuation of usufruc
Vlabel is using conciliatory language
Has the decrease in Flemish sales duty led to an increase in the costs for purchases of usufruct?
The decrease in sales duty: also for split purchase usufruct-bare ownership The recent drop in the rate (to 7.00%) for purchases of family homes comes with a number of conditions. For example, the purchaser must be a natural person. Following some uncertainty, it was subsequently confirmed that, in the event of a split purchase of such a property by a company for the usufruct and the bare owner f
The labour market of the future
Earn (on the side) flexibly and untaxed
There are three legal social statuses in Belgium, (i) employee, (ii) self-employed and (iii) civil servant. However, the question is often asked whether these classifications are still relevant to the rapidly evolving labour market in which flexibility is key and many people opt for a 'freelance status' or wish to combine several statuses. Voka has already called for a debate on the labour mark

Subscribe to our newsletter