Refugees from Ukraine can benefit from the tax benefit “30% ruling” in the Netherlands: court precedent

In times of war, Ukrainian refugees face numerous challenges in their host countries. The protection of their rights in legal, social and economic matters is becoming more and more urgent. This is especially true in developed countries such as the Netherlands, where refugees seek stability and employment opportunities. A significant precedent in the fight for tax benefits, in particular the “30% ruling”, demonstrated that even in difficult circumstances one can defend one’s rights. This story is not only an example of a successful legal battle, but also an indicator of how international tax rules can be adapted for people affected by war.

Tax benefits in the Netherlands: what is the “30% ruling”

The Netherlands is known for its progressive system of tax incentives aimed at attracting highly skilled workers from abroad. One of the most popular is the “30% ruling” — a special regime that allows foreign workers to receive 30% of their salary without paying taxes. This benefit is designed to ease the financial burden for newly arrived professionals, helping them to adapt more quickly to life in the Netherlands.

However, in order to receive this benefit, there are clear criteria: the employee must be hired from abroad, his annual income must exceed €46,108, and the move must be motivated by employment. In cases where we are talking about refugees, the situation becomes more complicated due to the specifics of their relocation.

Judicial precedent: Ukrainian refugee against Dutch tax authorities

In 2022, a Ukrainian refugee who moved to the Netherlands with his family because of the war became a participant in a high-profile lawsuit. His employer applied for the “30% ruling”, but the tax office refused, citing two key reasons:

1. The move to the country was not determined by employment, but had a personal nature.
2. At the time of starting work, the refugee was already living in the Netherlands, which, according to the tax office, violated the terms of the benefit.

The man went to court, arguing that these arguments do not meet the true purpose of the “30% ruling” and discriminate against him as an employee.

The court recognized that the actions of the tax authorities were unlawful. The main arguments in favor of the refugee included the following:

1. The motivation for moving is not decisive. The court ruled that war, as a reason for moving, should not be an obstacle to obtaining benefits, if all other criteria are met.
2. Lack of permanent connections with the Netherlands. The plaintiff proved that he had no long-term ties to the country before the war. He lived in Ukraine, owned real estate there, paid bills and had children who studied remotely in Ukrainian schools.

The court not only obliged the tax service to provide the benefit retroactively, but also ordered to compensate the court costs in the amount of €1,750. This decision became a strong precedent and a source of inspiration for many other refugees.

Consequently, the tax authorities of the Netherlands lost the lawsuit against the employer and the Ukrainian employee, which caused quite a stir. Although the court decision is not formally law for other cases, it creates an important reference point for Ukrainian refugees working in the Netherlands. From now on, they can apply to the tax authorities, referring to this precedent, and demand the application of preferential treatment.

How should Ukrainians act in a similar situation

Ukrainian refugees seeking tax relief can use the following tips:

1. Gather evidence of your life in Ukraine before moving. These can be documents for housing, utility bills, or children’s education certificates.
2. Apply for benefits through your employer. The employer acts as the main initiator of the process.
3. In case of refusal, contact lawyers. Legal assistance will help to competently challenge the decision of the tax service in court.

The story of a Ukrainian refugee who won a case against the Dutch tax authorities shows that protection of rights is possible even in the most difficult circumstances. She argues that international legal mechanisms can be adapted to unique situations such as war. For Ukrainians looking for a new life abroad, this is another opportunity to integrate, using available tools to support their economic situation.