Let’s skip the sugarcoating. If you fine people, you better be damn sure who did what wrong, when, and why. Otherwise, you're not administering justice, you’re tossing darts in the dark and hoping one sticks. And that’s not governance. It’s gambling with authority.

An internal memo from the Dutch Tax and Customs Administration, revealed through a Woo request, admits something professionals like me have long suspected: inspectors are imposing fines without properly investigating who is actually responsible for tax declaration errors. The tone of the memo? Sheepish. The content? Damning.

No One Behind the Wheel

The “memo schuldonderzoek” (debt investigation memo) from February 2024 shows that in far too many cases, the Administration has no clue whether an error stems from the taxpayer, an employee, or an external advisor. In a system where fines depend on culpability, this is not a minor flaw, it’s a structural failure. If you can’t identify the driver, how do you justify the speeding ticket?

Yet fines are still imposed. Arbitrarily. Often lazily. As if the act of issuing a penalty is more important than establishing its legitimacy. That’s not just sloppy, that’s dangerous.

The Shaky Ground Beneath the Fine

Let’s be clear. A fine without proven culpability is legally unstable. According to the guidelines themselves, inspectors are required to document both the origin of the mistake and the taxpayer's role in it. Yet they “regularly fail” to do so. Those are their words, not mine.

That’s not a misstep. That’s a cultural problem. A culture that rewards punishment over precision, optics over due process.

Burden of Proof: Reversed, Then Ignored

There was a time when the taxpayer had to prove they weren’t at fault. Rightly, that burden has shifted: now it’s up to the Tax Authority to prove deliberate wrongdoing or gross negligence. But here’s the kicker: they’re not doing that either. They’ve reversed the burden—and then skipped the responsibility.

If a qualified employee made the mistake? No fine. If an advisor gave bad advice? No fine—unless the taxpayer knowingly chose a shady consultant. These are not obscure exceptions. They’re the rules. And the memo shows inspectors are either unaware of them, or indifferent.

Fact-Finding is Not Optional

According to the memo, every audit must start with a clear factual inventory:

• Who prepares the return?
• How is accuracy ensured?
• What internal controls are in place?

If that groundwork isn’t done, the entire case crumbles on appeal. And guess what? Appeals cost time, money, and trust. All three are in short supply.

Yet the real issue isn't just legal exposure—it’s ethical erosion. When a public institution cuts corners on facts to fast-track fines, the damage goes beyond the spreadsheet. It’s a blow to civic trust and accountability.

My Message to Entrepreneurs and Accountants

If you're running a business, especially in the Netherlands, do not accept a fine as gospel.

• Ask: where is the penalty advice?
• Ask: who established culpability, and how?
• Ask: was the burden of proof met?

If the answer is vague or absent, contest it. Not emotionally. Legally. You are entitled to precision. Anything less is an abuse of process.

Our Message to You, the Entrepreneur

You run your business. We guard your back.

Because next time the Tax Authority comes with a fine built on shortcuts and shaky logic, they won’t be facing just you—they’ll be facing us.

They want to punish first and ask questions later? Fine.

We ask the right questions first—and make damn sure they answer.

We don’t flinch at memos, pressure, or uniforms. We know the rules, we track the facts, and we’ll tear apart any penalty that wasn’t earned.

So when they knock with assumptions, we’ll open the door with structure.

And if they try to shift the blame without evidence, we’ll be ready with files, clarity, and a very sharp red pen.

Because you shouldn’t have to fight guesswork with guesswork.

You have us for that.