Summary: Why This Judgment Matters for Every Dutch Micro-BV

If you're a Dutch entrepreneur who owns a micro-BV, a private limited company with one shareholder, this recent court decision is more than just a footnote in tax law. It’s a precedent-setting reminder: the Dutch Tax Authority (Belastingdienst) cannot base wage assumptions on social media activity alone.

The case centered on the gebruikelijk loon (customary salary) rule. The Tax Authority assigned a €46,000 salary to the sole shareholder of a BV, despite no formal evidence of her working in or for the company. Their “proof”? An Instagram bio, two YouTube videos, and a few video credits. No contract. No invoices. No internal documentation. And the court wasn’t having it.

What Is the Customary Salary Rule in the Netherlands?

Under Dutch tax law, if you own more than 5% of the shares in a BV, you are presumed to work for that company. Unless proven otherwise, you must pay yourself a minimum customary salary.

As of 2025:

• Minimum salary: €56,000
• Or the salary of the best-paid employee in your company (whichever is higher)

This rule is intended to prevent tax avoidance through artificial underpayment of shareholder-employees. But it’s often enforced bluntly, especially in micro-companies where ownership and labour can be difficult to separate.

The Court’s Message: “Proof, Not Presumptions”

Even though the entrepreneur filed her tax return late, shifting the burden of proof onto her, the judge still demanded real evidence from the Tax Authority. The verdict was clear:

“The mere presence of online content is not sufficient proof of operational involvement.”

This reinforces a powerful principle: the burden of proof does not disappear simply because a taxpayer misses a deadline. Assumptions must be backed by verifiable, administrative facts.

Key Takeaways for Dutch Micro BV Owners

1. Instagram is not evidence of employment

Social media mentions, bios, shout-outs, or YouTube credits, don’t count as proof that you’re actively working for your BV. The Belastingdienst must ground their assumptions in formal, traceable activity.

Action:

Keep personal branding separate from your company’s operational identity unless supported by contracts, invoices, or documented labour.

2. Ownership ≠ Employment

Just because you own 100% of the BV doesn’t mean you’re working in it. If you do no operational work, there may be no wage obligation.

Action:

• Issue a written declaration that you are not employed by your BV
• Update your Chamber of Commerce (KvK) record accordingly
• Share this with your accountant and tax advisor

3. Avoid implied involvement

If you don’t work for the BV, don’t act like you do, not even passively.

What to avoid:

• Having a company email or Slack account
• Signing contracts or invoices
• Appearing in video content as “CEO”
• Any trail that implies internal involvement

4. File your tax return, even if you think you owe nothing

In this case, the entrepreneur’s late filing gave the Tax Authority the upper hand. Don’t let procedural errors shift the burden of proof onto you.

Action:

• Set calendar alerts for tax deadlines
• If needed, file a provisional or placeholder return
• Ask your bookkeeper to confirm submission status

5. Schedule a proactive compliance check

Most entrepreneurs don’t realize when they’re accidentally signalling “employment” to the Tax Authority. Avoid grey zones.

Action:

Ask a GRC or tax compliance expert to review:

• Your BV’s wage structure
• Your declared vs actual involvement
• Your external visibility vs internal documentation

Why This Is Not a Fluke and Not a Victory Lap

This isn’t about beating the Belastingdienst. It’s about governance. The ruling proves that courts demand real evidence, but also that entrepreneurs must maintain structural clarity.

You can’t hide behind illness, ignorance, or assumptions. You can’t afford sloppy paperwork. But you can:

• Separate ownership and labour
• Stay administratively clean
• Make non-involvement explicit
• File on time

This judgment doesn’t give you an escape route. It gives you a compliance roadmap.

Governance Is Your Best Protection

In a fiscal landscape where tax authorities are increasingly aggressive and AI-driven in their detection models, governance is no longer optional. It's your defence, your signal of intent, and your legal shield.

This court case is a warning. Treat it like one.