Tax fuzzy on crypto, another missed opportunity

The Belgian tax saga around cryptoactives has taken a turn as unexpected as it is disappointing. For example,

What seemed to be a historic opportunity to finally clarify the tax treatment of capital gains on. Consequently, cryptocurrencies ended with a missed opportunity during the last cycle of negotiations of the coalition agreement of Wever I. Consequently, The hopes of a “solidarity contribution”. However, uniform of 10 %, on all profits, which they come from normal or abnormal management of private heritage, were destroyed at the last minute. For example,

Failing to have been able to consult the legal text. Consequently, the available reports suggest that the distinction between normal and abnormal management is maintained, as well as the rate of 33 % applicable to capital gains considered to be speculative. Similarly, As a tax lawyer. For tax fuzzy crypto, another missed example, I already see the first files arriving, but as a citizen, I can only regret this missed opportunity for legal security. Furthermore, The draft texts that gave hope in early 2025 promised a much necessary simplification. For example, A 10 % solidarity contribution on capital gains from January 1. Furthermore, 2026, regardless of normal management (abnormal), would finally end the ambiguity on what is exactly taxable as “normal management” compared to “abnormal management”. For example,

This distinction. Similarly, which is in practice as vague as the fog of one morning in November, caused frustration among crypto investors for years. Similarly, Is it speculative to trader a few times a year? Moreover, What if you put an important part of your assets in crypto? Or if you perform an intelligent transaction that brings in substantial profit? No one knows exactly, because there is practically no case law that offers tax fuzzy crypto, another missed indications. The tax administration. still in search of additional revenue, therefore has carte blanche to qualify the capital gains as unlimited speculative and require 33 %.

The government faced a unique opportunity to eliminate this arbitrariness. A uniform rate of 10 % – except for those who act professionally. who fall under professional income – would not only have given legal security, but also confidence in the Belgian tax system. Instead, the Government opts for a status quo which only feeds the greed of the tax authorities. Those who carefully declare their capital gains at 10 % risk an evaluation in which the tax authorities demand with an additional 23 %. arguing that the transaction was “speculative”. 10 % as a control tool. The result? A potential flow of discussion and tax procedures on the question of whether or not to act normally. An almost impossible task. since the tax fuzzy crypto, another missed criteria are so vague that the interpretation in practice would be equivalent to the arbitrariness of the controller.

Politicians do not seem to understand the practical consequences of their choice of compromise. Maintaining the rate of 33 % for abnormal management is not a neutral decision. It is a choice that perpetuates legal insecurity and digs the gap between citizens and tax authorities. In practice. this will lead to more disputes, more stress for investors and, let’s face it, more work for lawyers like me. But what benefits the profession of taxation is the whole of society that loses it. Legal certainty is the cornerstone of an equitable tax regime. and by sticking tax fuzzy crypto, another missed to it a outdated and vague distinction, the government spoils this opportunity.

The crypto investor is found in a gray. uncertain area of ​​tax law, where each transaction is a potential mines field. The stricter controls that will come from 2026 due to the European DAC8 directive. which obliges cryptocurrency platforms to declare transactions, will only increase the pressure. The tax administration receives more data. but in the absence of clear rules, it remains to be seen what is taxed at 10 % and what is taxed at 33 %. The result is a system that seems not only complex, but also fundamentally unfair. As a citizen, I can’t help but be indignant. It was time to unravel the tax entanglement around cryptoactives. Instead, the government opts for a shy solution that leaves the door wide open to discussions and procedures. The only winners? Lawyers who will be authorized tax fuzzy crypto, another missed to combat tax litigation in the years to come.

But for the crypto investor in Belgium compared to other Member States, it is a bitter pill to swallow. It could have been different, and it should have been otherwise.

Dave Van Moppes, partner and lawyer at Tuerlinckx Tax Lawyers