Dutch vote on box 3 wealth-gains tax postponed as minister is absent

Vote postponed after minister's absence

The Tweede Kamer did not complete its handling of the cabinet's box 3 bill on Monday, 9 November 2026. The bill was meant to be debated in full that day, but Finance Minister Eelco Heinen was in Brussels for a meeting with his EU counterparts, so the cabinet sent State Secretary Eerenberg (Fiscaliteit) in his place. A majority of MPs present refused to decide before they could question Heinen himself. The coalition had wanted to answer the questions in writing and treat them together with the tax plan, but that proposal was firmly rejected.

Coalition and opposition positions

NRC reports that the cabinet appears to have a majority in the lower house, made up of the coalition parties D66, VVD and CDA together with JA21, BBB and SGP. Those three opposition parties have long asked for a tax on realised gains instead of an annual tax on paper gains. Under the amended bill, savers and investors would pay tax on the return they actually earn when they sell assets, probably from 2029. The left-wing opposition was far less accommodating. PRO's Luc Stultiens, backed fully by the FvD and PVV, attacked the cost.

“An uncovered, blank cheque of 17 billion euros for the wealthy.”

CDA MP Van Dijk said his party found the financing tricky but was ready to support the bill if it could be justified. D66 MP Oosterhuis called Heinen's funding an interpretation of the budget rules that was rather creative.

“If it is at all responsible, we are willing to jump in.”

Outside box 3, the wider deal is contested. Gelderlander reports that PRO and Volt want a millionaire tax, which the VVD rejects, while BBB, JA21 and SGP want an end to the asylum dispersal law and a softer nitrogen approach.

Cost and funding gap

NRC reports that the amended bill has no funding for 17.5 billion euro, and that Heinen wants the state debt to rise by that amount to cover it. NRC puts the cost of the faster transition at more than 20 billion euro until 2040. The bill's appendix, as NOS reports, shows that the cabinet covers the lost revenue until 2031, but a gap of up to 17.6 billion euro opens after that period ends. Compared with earlier plans, the Heinen version lowers revenue by an estimated 22 billion euro until 2040.

Extra state debt (NRC)17.5

Lower revenue to 2040 vs earlier plans (NOS)22

Funding gap after 2031, up to (NOS)17.6

Extra state debt (NRC)

17.5 billion euro

Lower revenue to 2040 vs earlier plans (NOS)

22 billion euro

Funding gap after 2031, up to (NOS)

17.6 billion euro

Data from the article text

Advice and implementation risks

The Raad van State, the government's most important adviser, called the change too far-reaching to pass without careful parliamentary treatment. It advised withdrawing the proposal and drafting a new law that could take effect in 2030. The council also warned of legal procedures and of implementation problems at banks and the Belastingdienst, which must supply the data needed to check tax returns. The faster transition needs 250 extra full-time posts, while the tax authority is also due to cut staff under existing plans. Heinen had decided at the end of February to reopen box 3 plans that had reached the Eerste Kamer after years of work.

What comes next

Heinen must still debate his box 3 novelle with the Tweede Kamer, and the Finance committee wants to hear him later in the week of 9 November. The vote on the bill will not take place in that week. Pieter Grinwis of the ChristenUnie put it bluntly.

“The vote will no longer take place this week.”

A decisive vote on the 2027 tax plans was planned for Thursday, 12 November, but the cabinet still has to win over opposition parties before then.