VAT chain measures enter into force as of 1 May 2026

The reform of the VAT chain was initially introduced by a law of 12 March 2023, but was subsequently postponed in phases until 1 January 2025. As the implementation of these new rules was not yet feasible at that time, a transitional period was introduced, which initially ran until 1 October 2025 and was later prolonged indefinitely. On 4 March 2026, however, the federal administration announced that the postponed VAT chain measures will effectively enter into force as of 1 May 2026.

The VAT provision account

One of the main measures in the renewed VAT chain is the replacement of the existing VAT current account by the VAT provision account.

Amounts on the VAT current account will be transferred to the VAT provision account on the condition that all periodic VAT returns have been filed on 30 April 2026. Taxable persons for whom this is not the case will be given “a number of weeks” to submit the missing return(s). If they do not do so, it will be examined whether the credit is to be paid out to the bank account of the taxable person or used to offset an outstanding tax debt.

The communication from the federal administration further clarifies that, as of 1 May 2026, when the box to request a refund of the VAT credit is ticked in the periodic VAT return, this will only relate to the VAT credit resulting from that return (in other words, the amount mentioned in box 72). If a taxable person wishes to receive an outstanding VAT credit from the VAT provision account, a separate request will have to be submitted via MyMinfin.

New bank account numbers

As of 1 May 2026, the following bank account numbers must be used for payments to the VAT administration:

• BE41 6792 0036 4210: payments of VAT due resulting from a VAT return, late-payment interest and fines for non‑payment or partial payment (as long as no enforceable title is in place);
• BE42 6792 0000 0054: payments to settle a return once an enforceable title is in place.

These new bank account numbers will, in principle, apply for payments as of the monthly VAT return relating to April 2026.

VAT calendar for 2026

In the same communication, the federal administration also refers to the VAT calendar for 2026, from which a number of remarkable points emerge.

The usual “holiday scheme”, under which the filing deadline for the monthly VAT returns for June and July and the VAT return for the second quarter was extended until 10 August and 10 September respectively, will be abolished. However, if in 2026 these returns are still filed within the time limits of that holiday scheme, “as a transitional measure” no fines will be imposed for late filing. The communication does not mention whether such returns will then fall under the extended four‑year audit period. Furthermore, it should be noted that this measure only concerns the filing of the return, not the payment of the VAT due.

The calendar further shows that the extension to the next working day (if the filing deadline falls on a weekend or public holiday) will continue to apply for monthly VAT returns, but not for quarterly VAT returns. For example, the filing deadline for the VAT return for the second quarter of 2026 will fall on Saturday 25 July 2026 and will not be extended to Monday 27 July 2026. However, this does not apply to the VAT return for the first quarter of 2026: the filing deadline for this VAT return will still be extended to Monday 27 April 2026 (instead of Saturday 25 April 2026).

The same applies to the filing deadline of the intracommunity listings: the extension to the next working day only applies if they are filed on a monthly basis, not if they are filed on a quarterly basis. To make things even more complex, the intracommunity listing for the first quarter of 2026 is subject to a different filing deadline than the VAT return for the same period. Whereas the extension until Monday 27 April 2026 is still applicable for the VAT return (see above), the intracommunity listing must already be filed on Saturday 25 April 2026. One can wonder if these seemingly inconsistent rules were really intended and, if so, why.