On 15 October 2026, the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered an important judgment concerning estate planning for EU officials and other servants.

by Lida ACHTARI, Tax Counsel

A tax domicile that may differ from the place of residence

Protocol No 7 on the privileges and immunities of the European Union provides for a special regime for officials and other servants who move to another Member State by reason of their duties.

Subject to certain conditions, for the purposes of income tax, wealth tax and inheritance tax, they retain their tax domicile in the Member State in which they were domiciled when they entered the service of the Union.

Gift tax, however, is not expressly mentioned in the Protocol.

According to the Court of Justice, this rule also applies to gifts

The case before the Court of Justice concerned a member of staff of the European Investment Bank who had left Austria to take up duties in Luxembourg before subsequently moving to Germany.

In 2013, his brother made a gift of EUR 300,000 to him. The German tax authorities sought to subject the gift to German gift tax.

One of the questions was whether the special tax domicile regime under the Protocol, which does not expressly refer to gift tax, could also apply to that tax.

The CJEU answered in the affirmative. In particular, the Court considered that gifts and inheritances share sufficiently similar characteristics to justify coherent treatment. Excluding gifts from the scope of the Protocol could result in the same official having a tax domicile in one State for inheritance tax purposes and in another State for gift tax purposes.

The Court also confirmed that a subsequent transfer of the official’s residence to another Member State for personal reasons does not, in itself, affect the tax domicile retained in the Member State of origin.

What are the implications for EU officials living in Belgium?

The judgment may significantly alter the analysis of estate planning strategies.

Before making any gift, the official’s tax domicile for the purposes of the Protocol must be identified and the gift tax rules applicable in that State must be examined.

The outcome will not necessarily be more favourable. Depending on the State of origin, the tax burden may be higher or lower than the Belgian gift tax that would otherwise have applied.

The analysis does not stop at tax domicile. The beneficiary’s residence, the location of the transferred assets and any other connecting factors provided for under the relevant legislation must also be examined.

Should existing estate plans be reviewed?

Some estate plans may have been developed on the assumption that the special tax domicile provided for by the Protocol applied to inheritances but not to gifts. That assumption must however be reconsidered in light of the Court of Justice’s recent judgment.

It may therefore be appropriate for the EU officials and other servants concerned to review both their future wealth transfer plans and the estate planning arrangements already in place.

Our private wealth tax team remains available to assess the implications of this judgment for your particular circumstances.