Transfer Pricing guide: Netherlands
Read below for more detailed information on transfer pricing regulations, document requirements, and other considerations for the Netherlands, as well as recent industry hot topics and key developments in the country's business landscape.
Page updated 1st July 2026
Transfer Pricing regulations
Is the jurisdiction part of OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS?
Yes.
Relevant Transfer Pricing regulation
art. 8b Dutch CIT Act lays down the ALP principle
artt. 8ba, 8bb, 8bc and 8bd regarding countering mismatches in application of arm's length principle
artt. 29b - 29h Dutch CIT implement LF, MF and CBCR
Transfer Pricing decree of 14 June 2022 nr. 2022-0000139020, Staatscourant 2022, nr. 16685
PE profit allocation decree 2022, 14 June 2022, nr. 2022-0000143421, Staatscourant 2022, nr. 16683
Amount B decree nr. 2024-0000528135, Staatscourant 2024, nr. 38369
APA/ATR decree BWBR0042342
Documentation requirements regulation nr. 2025-47457
Is this regulation aligned with the OECD Guidelines
Yes, for the most part.
Transfer Pricing documentation requirements
Documentation Threshold for Preparation of Local File/ TP Documentation
EUR 50m group turnover
Documentation Threshold for Preparation of Master File
EUR 50m group turnover
Documentation Threshold for Preparation of Country by Country Report
EUR 750m group turnover
Submission of Local File, Master File, and CbC Report Required? If so, when?
Master file and Local file are to be submitted upon request.
Notification regarding the CbCR report should be done by the last day of the FY of the MNE group Annual submission is required. One entity can file on behalf of multiple entities in the Netherlands.
The CbCR should be filed within 12 months after the end of the FY of the MNE group.
If No Submission Required, any Other Deadline?
Yes, the TP documentation should be ready when the Tax Return is filed. (When the extension for filing the tax return expires). The return should be filed within five months after the end of the FY, but this can be extended. Taxpayers can request an extension either themselves (for an additional five months) or through their advisor (for an additional 11 months)".
Other Documentation Requirements
When filing tax return, in some cases a box needs to be ticked, for example whether TP documentation (MF and LF) is applicable [as of FY 2023] or wheter there was a business restructuring and/or transfer of IP.
Does TP documentation / Local file Need to be Prepared Contemporaneously with Tax Return Filing (i.e., before filing the return)?
Yes.
Transfer Pricing Specific Returns
Preparation of TP Return Required?
No separate TP return applicable.
Deadline for TP Return Filing
N/A
Key information to be included in the TP Return
N/A
Benchmarking - Local Tax Authority Preferences
Local vs Regional Comparables Set
EU set is accepted, local set preferred.
Single-Year vs Multi-Year Analysis
Multi year is accepted, single year preferred.
Public vs Private Comparables
Private comparables.
Interquartile Range or Full Range
IQR, median is preferred as policy.
Transaction-Based or Aggregate Approach, or Both
Both.
How Often are Benchmarking Sets Renewed (financial update versus full scope BMS preparation)
Ideally: once in 3 years a new BM and in the two years in between, every year a financial update.
TP Penalties
In Case of Delayed Submission of Documentation
In case of non- compliance of the TP documentation the DTA can:
A. issue an information order that may lead to reversal and aggravation of the burden of proof (reversal of burden of proof);
B. Criminal action 68 and 69 Awr: administrative fine not exceeding 4rd category (as of January 1, 2024: € 25.750 )
C. Initiate civil proceedings, usually in summary proceedings with imposition of penalty payment.
Note 1: We have not seen situation B in practice yet, but we see a small trend that now in TP cases the Dutch tax inspectors sometimes do involve their colleagues “Fine coordinators” for consultation purposes.
Note 2: The TP law cases in NL do clearly show that if the burdon of proof is shifted to the taxpayer, the taxpayer is loosing the case.
Note 3: Since introduction of a separate question on restructurings in the tax return, burden of proof is shifted very easily.
For intentionally or with gross negligence not, not timely, not completely or not correctly providing country report or the notification of the country report, a fine of at most 6th category (per January 1, 2026: € 1,100,000) applies (Art. 29h VPB jo. Art 23 sr).
In case of Income Adjustments in Course of a Tax audit
The corporate tax interest applied in NL is:
- 4% from 2023-jan to 2023-jun
- 6% from 2023-jul to 2023-dec
- 7.5% from 2024-jan to 2024-dec
- 6.5% from 2025-jan to 2025-dec
- 5% from 2026-jan to 2026-dec
Above amounts are the corrected amounts after the Supreme Court ruled earlier tax interest amounts were not in line with the “proportionality principle”.
Other Considerations
APA & MAP Availability
Yes.
Applicability of Safe Harbour Rules
There are no safe harbors.
Critical Transfer Pricing Issues Prevailing in the Jurisdiction, if any
None, currently.
Criteria/ Guidelines for Transfer Pricing Audit/ Assessments by Tax Authority
N/A
Meet the experts
Wherever your business operates, HLB's specialists combine local expertise with global collaboration to deliver practical advice, helping organisations navigate challenges, seize opportunities and achieve their ambitions.
The Netherlands did not implement Amount B for Dutch taxpayers who perform routine marketing and distribution activities.
As member of the Inclusive Framework, the Netherlands will accept the outcome of the application of Amount B applied by “covered jurisdictions” in case:
- The covered jurisdiction has implemented Amount B in its local law and regulations; and
- A treaty between NL and this Covered jurisdiction is present.
The Dutch tax authorities’ transfer pricing specialist group is actively educating tax inspectors through centrally prepared toolkits, manuals for specific topics, and standardised questionnaires.
The Dutch tax authorities and Customs organisations are increasing there collaboration, increasing the importance of considering the pricing of import transactions.
During an audit, the possibility of transfer pricing issues being scrutinised may be considered to be medium/high.
The Netherlands has concluded many bilateral tax treaties and has ratified the MLI, including the application of mandatory binding arbitration.
Specific guidance on the Dutch interpretation and approach to MAPs has been outlined in a MAP decree (as published by the Ministry of Finance of 11 June 2020, no. 2020-32689).
Relevant articles in the Dutch CIT 1969
Article 8b Dutch CIT 1969 – Arm’s Length Principle
This article codifies the arm’s length principle in Dutch legislation. It states that transactions between affiliated parties must be conducted under conditions comparable to those that would apply between independent parties.
Articles 29b–29h Dutch CIT 1969– Documentation Requirements
These articles implement the documentation obligations arising from BEPS Action 13, including:
- Master File and Local File: Required for companies with a consolidated group turnover of €50 million or more.
- Country-by-Country Reporting (CbCR): Mandatory for multinational groups with a consolidated turnover of €750 million or more.
Articles 8bb–8bd Dutch CIT 1969 – Anti-Mismatch Provisions
These articles were introduced in 2022 to prevent double non-taxation resulting from transfer pricing mismatches, such as valuation discrepancies between jurisdictions. These articles aim to prevent tax base erosion through transfer pricing mismatches.
- Article 8bb Dutch CIT 1969 – Prevents Dutch taxpayers from making unilateral downward adjustments to their taxable income based on the arm's length principle unless there is a corresponding upward adjustment in the counterparty's jurisdiction.
- Article 8bc Dutch CIT 1969 – Prevents Dutch taxpayers to adjust the value of assets or liabilities – transferred from another jurisdiction – to an at arm’s length value if the transferor's jurisdiction does not recognize a corresponding adjustment.
- Article 8bd Dutch CIT 1969 – This provision applies to transactions such as capital contributions, profit distributions, and mergers or demergers involving affiliated entities.
Relevant legislation
- Dutch Transfer Pricing decree (as published by the Ministry of Finance on 1 July 2022)
- Dutch Profit Allocation to Permanent Establishment decree (as published by the Ministry of Finance on 1 July 2022)
- Dutch MAP decree (as published by the Ministry of Finance on 11 June 2020)
- Dutch APA/ATR decree (as published by the Ministry of Finance on 21 December 2023)
- Dutch regulation on documentation requirements (OECD based): as published by the Ministry of Finance on 30 December 2025)
Implementation Pilar 1
Dutch Implementation of Pillar One Amount B decree
(as published by the Ministry of Finance of 4 December 2024, no. 2024-38369)
Implementation Pilar 2
- The Minimum Tax Act 2024 (as published on 27 December 2023)
- Executive decree Minimum Tax Act 2024 (as published on 23 December 2024)
- The Amendment to the Minimum Tax Act 2024 (as published on 23 December 2024)
Alignment with the OECD Guidelines
The Netherlands is well aligned with the OECD Guidelines.
Benchmarking Analyses nuances or preferences
No specific nuances or preferences by the Dutch Tax Authorities.
Thin Capitalisation considerations for IC loans
In general, based on article 8b Dutch CIT 1969, intra-group loans – just as any other intercompany transaction – must comply with the arm’s length principle.
As of 1 January 2025, article 15b Dutch CIT 1969 states that (implementation of the earnings stripping rule of ATAD 1):
Net interest deductions (including IC loans) are limited to the higher of:
- 5% of the taxpayer’s EBITDA, or
- a €1 million threshold.
The Netherlands did not implement any escape rules.
Furthermore, based on articles 8bb and 10a Dutch CIT 1969, interest on IC loans may be non-deductible if
Article 8bb Dutch CIT 1969: The interest is not taxed at the level of the recipient (e.g., due to hybrid mismatches)
Article 10a Dutch CIT 1969: The loan is used to fund dividend distributions, capital contributions or acquisitions of shares, unless:
- It can be demonstrated that the transaction and loan are primarily business-motivated, and
- The interest is taxed adequately in the hands of the recipient (usually 10% or higher effective taxation).
Primary risk areas in this jurisdiction around transfer pricing
In the Netherlands two primary risk areas could be mentioned:
1) In principle, the burden of proof regarding transfer pricing typically lies with the Dutch tax authority — they must demonstrate that a taxpayer’s transfer prices are not at arm’s length.
However, if the Dutch taxpayer has no transfer pricing documentation this burden of proof very easily is shifted to the Dutch taxpayer. The Dutch taxpayer will then have to proof that the Dutch tax authorities point of view on the – from their perspective – to be applied transfer pricing policy is not at arm’s length.
Jurisprudence clearly shows that the taxpayers usually do not succeed in front of the court to achieve that goal.
Important note in this respect is that recently a separate question was included in the tax return on whether a restructuring applied which, if not properly addressed, can easily result in a shift in the burden of proof.
2) The corporate tax interest in the Netherlands varies from 5% - 7,5% for FY23 through FY26. A solid transfer pricing policy is also from this perspective a must since the discussions with the Dutch Tax Authorities and/or court proceeding tend to have a long lead time.
