Nobody moves country solely for a tax ruling

There are conversations going on in the Netherlands right which I find increasingly difficult to ignore. It is the conversation that frames international professionals as a burden, taking housing, benefiting from tax advantages, competing with locals for resources that are already stretched thin.

Housing is genuinely under pressure. The expat ruling is genuinely unequal in how it is perceived. These are real tensions, not invented ones.

But the conclusion being drawn from this, that the presence of internationals is the problem, is just pointing in any kind of direction without critical thinking. At Rehive People, we see the consequences of that conclusion every day. Not in abstract policy terms. In real conversations, with real people, making real decisions, both at the landlord side, realtors and internationals.

What we see from the inside

Rehive People sits at a particular intersection. We work with the employers attracting international talent and the professionals trying to build a life here. We see both sides of the equation and increasingly, we see both sides under pressure at the same time.

What concerns me most is not the housing shortage itself, or the changes to the expat ruling, or the tightening immigration policy. Each of those challenges is manageable in isolation. What concerns me is the direction of travel. If the Netherlands continues down this path by restricting supply, reducing financial incentives, creating an environment where internationals feel less welcome, we are not solving a problem. We are creating a larger one.

The market is at a tipping point. Housing is locked up. Talent is looking elsewhere. And the entrepreneurial engine that has made this country one of the most innovative economies in Europe is beginning to run short of the fuel it needs to keep going.

The housing narrative needs to be challenged

The Dutch housing shortage did not begin when international hiring accelerated. It was built over decades through chronic underbuilding, a planning system that makes development slow and expensive, and a regulatory environment that has consistently prioritised restriction over supply.

The problem has three distinct layers. 

The first is volume: the Netherlands has simply not built enough homes relative to population growth and household formation for a very long time. 

The second is type: the homes that have been built do not reflect how demand has shifted. Too many large family homes, not enough smaller units for the singles, young professionals, and people in transition who make up an increasingly large share of housing demand. 

The third layer is recent and acute: since July 2024, new government regulations have tightened the private rental market to the point where landlords are exiting in significant numbers. Supply is shrinking. Prices in the remaining stock are rising.

The candidates most affected are not internationals specifically. They are everyone without existing housing , which includes a very large number of Dutch people.

Landlords excluding the 30% ruling from salary calculations. Listings gone within hours. Viewings with forty other candidates. That is no longer an open and welcoming market. And a professional who spends their first ninety days in survival mode is not a professional who is integrating, contributing, or planning to stay.

Pointing at internationals as the cause of this does not build a single house. It just makes the Netherlands a harder sell.

The economic case is not optional

Setting the housing debate aside entirely, there is a more fundamental argument that gets lost in the noise: the Netherlands needs international talent. Not as a nice-to-have. Not as a temporary measure. As a structural economic necessity.

The Dutch labour market is one of the tightest in Europe. There are sectors like technology, engineering, healthcare, energy, financial services, where the domestic talent pipeline simply cannot meet demand at the pace the economy requires. ASML cannot build the world's most advanced semiconductor machines with a purely Dutch workforce. Adyen and Mollie cannot maintain their positions as global fintech leaders without drawing from a global talent pool. The Amsterdam-Delta ecosystem has surpassed Paris and Berlin as the leading startup ecosystem in the EU and it did not get there by closing its doors.

When we make the Netherlands a less attractive destination for international talent, we do not protect Dutch jobs. We weaken the companies that create them.

From where we sit, that risk is not theoretical. We see internationals choose our surrounding countries as they became an easier sell. Processing times are comparable. Tax benefits are competitive. And the public narrative is less hostile. That gap is growing. And if it continues to grow, the entrepreneurial development that has defined the Netherlands' economic story for the past decade will stall not from a lack of ambition, but from a lack of people to execute it.

What drives the decision to move

Here is what years of relocation conversations have taught us: nobody uproots their life for a tax ruling.

The 30% ruling opens a conversation. It makes the Netherlands financially legible as a destination. But it does not close decisions. The factors that tip the balance are harder to quantify and much more human.

Safety matters enormously, particularly for professionals moving with families. An international environment matters. The ability to land somewhere and find a community of people who understand the experience of relocation makes an enormous difference to whether someone settles well or leaves within two years. Dutch culture itself is a draw due its directness, the work-life balance, the pragmatism. And increasingly, purpose matters. The professionals making the most significant relocations want to do it for something that means something.

Salary and the expat ruling open the conversation. They rarely close it.

What this means for employers

The practical implication is straightforward, even if it requires a shift in thinking. Competing for international talent on compensation alone is a losing strategy, not because compensation does not matter, but because every other country in Europe is also competing on it, and some have more to offer right now than the Netherlands.

The organisations that are winning this competition are the ones offering the full picture. A narrative alongside a salary. A genuine investment in making the transition work with housing support, partner support, cultural onboarding, a relocation experience that treats people as people making a significant life decision, not a resource to be deployed.

At Rehive People, this is the conversation we are having with employers every week. The ones who get it are building teams that stay. The ones who do not are cycling through international hires every eighteen months and wondering why retention is a problem.

The direction of travel has to change

The Netherlands has every reason to be confident about its offer to international talent. English proficiency that leads the world. A central location in Europe. An innovative ecosystem that punches well above weight. A culture that values directness, balance, and personal freedom.

None of that disappears because the political climate has become more complicated. But it requires active stewardship. 

The pond is drying up. The answer is not to decide who gets to fish. The answer is to build a better water system.