Netherlands advances proposal to tax savings, equities and crypto at 36%

The Dutch lower parliamentary body voted to push forward legislation that would impose a 36% tax on unrealized gains in savings, liquid investments and cryptocurrencies. The bill cleared the chamber with 93 votes in favor, exceeding the number needed to advance, and now awaits consideration by the upper house; sponsors propose implementation in the 2028 tax year if it becomes law. Unlike conventional capital gains regimes that tax realized profits, this design targets increases in value whether assets are sold or held, a technical shift that raises complex valuation and enforcement questions for volatile assets such as crypto. Industry commentators and some entrepreneurs warned that a high, broad-based levy could encourage relocation of capital and people to jurisdictions with friendlier tax treatment, recalling past episodes where tax changes influenced migration decisions. A public example circulated by analysts illustrates the magnitude: an assumed long-term savings plan that would grow to roughly €3.32 million under current rules drops to about €1.885 million under the proposed regime, a reduction of roughly €1.435 million over 40 years. That example underscores how compounding interacts with a recurring charge on unrealized appreciation, but real-world impacts will depend on implementation details like valuation windows, exemptions and bilateral tax considerations. From a revenue perspective, the government could see a near-term boost if compliance is high, yet the policy risks shrinking the taxable base and prompting avoidance strategies that erode expected receipts. Administratively, taxing unrealized gains on crypto exposes tax authorities to measurement problems: exchange fragmentation, off-chain holdings, private keys, and timing disputes create fertile ground for compliance disputes and litigation. The move also sits within a wider European debate about harmonizing crypto taxation; divergent national regimes could accelerate capital flows rather than harmonize outcomes. Political dynamics matter: the Senate vote and subsequent regulatory guidance will determine whether the proposal becomes a durable rule or a transitory shock prompting legislative revision. For investors, the change shifts portfolio calculus and residency decisions; for firms operating in crypto and fintech, it alters the operating environment for talent and capital attraction. In short, the proposal is a fiscal recalibration with technical, legal and market consequences that extend well beyond the immediate revenue projection, and its ultimate effect will hinge on precise drafting, valuation protocols, and international tax interplay.