Proposition 54K2740

Projet de loi modifiant le Code des impôts sur les revenus 1992 en vue d'instaurer une réduction d'impôt pour les frais d'adoption.

General information ¶

Authors

CD&V Sonja Becq, Roel Deseyn, Eric Van Rompuy, Jef Van den Bergh

Submission date

Oct. 24, 2017

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

adoption of a child personal income tax tax relief tax law

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP ∉ Open Vld N-VA MR PVDA | PTB PP VB

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

March 1, 2018 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr Robert Van de Velde, rapporteur, refers to the written report.

Anyone who wants to adopt a child has a long way to go. It is not only a matter of being found fit and obtaining permission to be able to adopt, often one remains very uncertain about the arrival of the child until the last moment.

In addition, and that’s what this bill is about, adoption budgetarily weighs very heavily on the candidate adoptive parents. They must pay the entire procedure themselves.

The proposal, which we will approve here tonight, because I am counting on that, is meant to take a family-friendly measure and give a tax reduction to families who wish to adopt a child. This ⁇ fits into our broader effort to make our society more family-friendly, or in this case more adoption-friendly. For example, adoptive parents approach natural parents in financial terms.

As mentioned above, the cost of adoption can be very high. They differ, of course, depending on whether it is a domestic or a foreign adoption. I will give you some numbers. We see that a domestic adoption can still quickly cost 8 000 euros and for a foreign adoption the costs are on average between 10 000 and 15 000 euros. There are also outlets known, for example in the French Community, up to 35 000 euros. More than 40 000 euros is apparently not even a rare exception.

This proposal is more than in place. We want to provide concrete support to potential adoptive parents by providing them with a tax reduction of 20 % of the costs incurred, with a maximum of 6 150 euros. In this way, families who are in doubt can take the step towards adoption. They will receive only a partial tax reduction, a fifth of the costs, but this can make a difference for the parties concerned.

We discussed a number of budgetary costs. In a maximum scenario, it was talked about 1.3 million euros. However, due to the declining trend in the number of adoptions, ⁇ from other countries, and due to the long time of the procedure, the budgetary costs will be absolutely lower. I suspect about four hundred to five hundred thousand euros.

It is nice that several groups in this Parliament have been able to engage in practical implementation of this proposal. I’ve noticed in the responses via mail or phone that many people were happy when they learned that this proposal would become law. There were some practical questions.

Therefore, I take this opportunity to say something about it.

The question is what costs the bill takes into account, because of course there are a lot of costs in practice. I will not overlook them all, but I will zoom into the specific cost items that can be taken into account for the deduction.

In the case of domestic adoption, that shall be the expenses related to the eligibility procedure and the expenses for expenses charged by an authorised adoption service. I will not mention all costs, which makes little sense, but it is important to take note of the major headings.

International adoption involves the costs of the eligibility procedure, as well as the costs of filing in the country of origin of the adopted child.

An important section are travel costs and accommodation costs. There was some political discussion on this. We eventually landed on the consensus that adoptive parents can include a go-and-return trip in the cost box to qualify for the tax reduction.

Per ⁇ we should look at this again in the future, because in practice one has to travel several times. This has nothing to do with the merely will of the candidate adoptive parents, but much with the measures taken in the country of origin. For example, if the possibility of an appeal procedure exists, one must wait four weeks before the procedure in the country of origin can be completed. During this period, there should be no contact with the child concerned. Of course, those parents will return to Belgium in the meantime, unless they can arrange this with holidays at work, and they must return. When it comes to, for example, Uganda or Kazakhstan, you will understand that this involves huge costs.

Today we have drawn a line in this by including a go-and-return journey per candidate adoptive parent. For the cost of living, we align ourselves with the standard tables available to foreign affairs officials.

Thus, an absolute maximum of 6 150 euros tax reduction for the tax year 2019 is achieved. That absolute maximum can only be reached – a simple calculation of a fifth of the costs – if one exceeds EUR 30 750 in adoption costs.

Foreign adoption, of course, also raises questions because it takes a long period. How is this accounted for? At what period does this relate?

In practice, this tax reduction is granted during the taxable period in which the adoption procedure is concluded. The reduction applies to the expenses incurred in that taxable period and the five taxable periods preceding it. In a very concrete way, this means that the costs incurred in the year itself and in the five years before the conclusion of the procedure can be included in the personal tax. I think you are all convinced that those five years are absolutely necessary, because in fact this is still quite modestly counted. After all, there are procedures that take much longer. If one can charge the costs of the five previous years and the year in which the procedure is completed, one can still enjoy a considerable tax reduction in certain cases.

The question is when the adoption process will be closed. We cannot give a definitive exclusion on this matter this afternoon, Mr. Speaker, because there is still a royal decree to be issued. Through this law, we authorize the King to further define the concept of "end". This, however, is quite crucial for the data subjects, as there is some margin for which costs can be charged precisely, as well as for defining the periods. For example, one could look at the date of the recognition judgment or the date of recognition by the Federal Central Authority for adoption. However, I advocate for the date of entry in the population register. Especially in the procedure of cross-border adoptions, it is not insignificant to define that deadline in this way.

To outline the importance of the end point of adoption, I will give the following practical example. Assuming that a couple of adoptive parents terminates the procedure on 3 March 2018, they can charge the costs incurred in the year 2018, including the costs incurred after the actual termination, and those of five years before that. Assuming that the adoption procedure is terminated on 15 December 2018, one will be able to do the same, but then the costs that may be made and paid after the termination date will only be charged when they were realized in 2018. In this case, there are 15 days left. This, of course, makes a big difference with a procedure that is completed in March. When completing the procedure at the end of the year, one must be administratively alert to check which payments and fees can be charged exactly.

In fact, it may happen that adoptive parents can already welcome their child, but that the adoption procedure has not yet formally concluded because, for example, one is still waiting for an entry in the population register.

Then, however, they can still resort to the tax reduction. For adoptive parents who are in such a situation because their adoptive child, for example, has been living with them since the end of last year, this is not insignificant. That’s why I call on the government – I expect you to tell your colleagues, Minister Bellot – to work quickly on a royal decision. I am actually optimistic about this because the Minister of Finance has already committed to not wait too long, so that people do not live in uncertainty and do not have practical, administrative concerns about a correct declaration.

In addition, the proposal also provides for a division between married and legally cohabiting persons. Of course, you cannot enjoy the tax reduction twice in the head of the same family. How will this go practically? In the case of a joint offence of married and legally cohabiting persons, the tax reduction will be distributed proportionally on the basis of the taxable income of both spouses or the legally cohabiting persons.

Finally, I have pointed out for a moment that with regard to the costs the authority is given to the King to set further conditions. In that context, for example, I had already referred to the daily maximum for the officials of Foreign Affairs to which the living costs will be linked. All costs incurred in the context of a procedure by an authorised adoption service are therefore eligible for a tax reduction.

There is another important element about which there are many questions that I think arise from a very human reflex: even adoption procedures that were discontinued prematurely, for whatever reason, are eligible for a tax reduction. This can then be described as a definitive termination, hence the definition of termination of the procedure is very important. This will also reduce the burden of taxpayers who ultimately – very unfortunately – see their adoption wishes smoke up. It is therefore very important that the royal decree is edited very carefully. We could not simply write that into the law because it is about practical modalities that very good agreements need to be made.

I would like to discuss the contents of the present bill. I would like to thank you for your support in the preparation and voting tonight.

We are very pleased to see this proposed legislation succeed. It was voted unanimously in the Finance Committee. Last week, it was an improvement in the orphanage tax regime. This week is an improvement for adoptive parents. Adoption is a long, difficult and costly path. This bill does not have a big budget cost, but it improves the fate of the affected families. The MR group is very pleased to support this bill.

This tax-related advancement will allow support for parents wishing to adopt. We know how difficult the journey is and much more when it comes to international adoption. Supporting parents in terms of expenses, often extremely high, has been at the heart of the CDH for some time.

The CD&V remembers this: a little before you, we had submitted a bill on this subject, which is now attached. We are delighted to have been able to bring together the entire House to support this type of device. In addition to this financial support for adopters, other provisions will still need to be made that do not concern, of course, the tax area but other competences at the federal level, at the level of the Regions and the Communities. I dare hope that together, in the federal, we can still move forward.

I also thank Benoît Dispa who did the job in my place as I was absent at that time. Thank you for allowing us to move forward on this issue together.

Mr. Speaker, briefly, in support of this proposal, the Socialist Group will vote in favour of this bill. Adoption is a gesture of love that is not necessarily a long, quiet river. This is a wonderful adventure for both parents and children. Supporting them throughout the process, especially through tax, is obvious to us.

Mr. Speaker, we will approve the present bill, but I would like to repeat the concerns I made in the committee for a moment in the plenary session. It is a good thing that we, as a government, intervene in the costs of adoption, there is no discussion about that.

However, I think we are doing it in the wrong way. We are complaining in all groups that we continue to add customs in our tax system. The proposed regulation is another example of this. In my view, the choice of a deduction of costs is the least appropriate means for the government to intervene in something that is legitimate.

It would be much better to regulate this at the Flemish level with regard to Flanders. You can immediately intervene in the costs. Colleague Deseyn argues, among other things, that adoption costs a lot of money, which for some can be an obstacle to adopting. This barrier is not removed. We all know how the tax system works. The deduction can be submitted at the next declaration and only a year later, at the attack, you get the tax reduction. This can be two years or more after the expenses have been made.

Mr. Speaker, colleagues, again, we support the proposal, because we believe that it is a compensation in the costs of adoption for those who want to adopt and that otherwise cannot. We can only support them in this. However, we should advocate for a better tool at the regional level. Candidate parents can be granted immediate intervention if they incur adoption costs. We would do that much better.

For us, this is an intermediate step. The next step should be taken at the regional level.