On 15 June 2026, the Belgian Ruling Commission published its 2025 annual report. The report provides insight into the functioning of the ruling practice, recent operational developments and key trends in areas such as transfer pricing and the innovation income deduction.
Overall, the report, available in Dutch and French, confirms a more demanding ruling environment, with decisions increasingly driven by economic substance, factual consistency and robust supporting documentation.
Functioning of the ruling practice
From an operational perspective, the Belgian Ruling Commission continues to face structural challenges. Staffing constraints and the turnover of experienced professionals remain relevant concerns, despite a modest increase in staffing levels in 2025. Ensuring sufficient expertise and continuity within the service therefore remains a key priority.
Nevertheless, the report shows that the Commission reduced its average processing time to 57 days in 2025, compared with 62 days in 2024. This gradual improvement suggests that internal processes have been further streamlined. However, the shorter processing time should not be interpreted as a more lenient assessment of ruling requests.
Transfer pricing aspects
In the area of transfer pricing, the 2025 report confirms the Commission’s consistent and strict approach, with a clear focus on economic reality and the underlying functional analysis.
A key message is that changes in transfer pricing outcomes must be supported by actual changes in economic activity. For example, the Commission did not accept that a change in the accounting treatment of intra-group invoices could justify a material change in the transfer pricing methodology or remuneration where the underlying functional profile had remained unchanged.
This confirms that administrative or contractual changes alone are not sufficient to support a revised transfer pricing method or remuneration. Only genuine changes in functions, decision-making, risk control or asset ownership are likely to be relevant.
The report also refers to the Brussels Court of Appeal judgment of 11 June 2025, which clarifies when the tax authorities may disregard a ruling. According to the judgment, a ruling may only be set aside in cases involving misrepresentation, omission of essential facts or fraud.
This creates an important balance. While the Commission applies a strict substance-based analysis when granting or amending rulings, a ruling obtained on the basis of complete and accurate facts continues to provide a strong level of legal certainty.
For taxpayers, this means that obtaining or amending a ruling may require more detailed substantiation. At the same time, the protection offered by an existing ruling remains robust, provided the facts described in the ruling continue to reflect the taxpayer’s actual situation.
Innovation income deduction
The innovation income deduction remains an important part of the ruling practice.
The report confirms that the Commission applies a strict and fact-driven approach when assessing innovation income deduction cases. Its analysis goes beyond the formal existence of intellectual property and also considers the quality, robustness and continued validity of the underlying IP.
This approach is particularly relevant in renewal cases. In one case, a Belgian company had developed several patents and filed patent applications at the time of its initial ruling request in 2021, although not all patents had yet been granted. The ruling required the taxpayer to inform the Commission of any negative findings resulting from the patent novelty examination and to provide an appropriate response. After the patents were granted, however, the taxpayer did not disclose negative observations identified during the examination process. When the taxpayer requested a renewal of the ruling in 2024, the Commission took this omission into account and adjusted the methodology used to determine the qualifying innovation income, resulting in a downward revision of the calculated income.
This example illustrates that innovation income deduction rulings require ongoing monitoring. Taxpayers must ensure that the applied methodology remains aligned with the underlying facts and that relevant developments are disclosed in a timely and complete manner.
In practice, this requires active monitoring of the IP position, including technical developments, patent outcomes and the continued correct application of the calculation methodology. Shortcomings in this respect may lead to adjustments or delays when obtaining or renewing a ruling.
Key takeaway
The 2025 report confirms a more disciplined and substance-driven ruling practice. Transfer pricing outcomes must be supported by real changes in economic activity, while the innovation income deduction requires ongoing validation of both the underlying IP and the applied methodology.
At the same time, the report reaffirms that rulings continue to provide a high level of legal certainty when they are based on complete and accurate facts.
Overall, the report does not introduce a fundamentally new approach. Rather, it confirms a clear trend towards stricter assessment. Taxpayers should therefore prepare ruling requests and renewals with a strong focus on substance, robust documentation and continued alignment with the underlying facts.