Imagine an employee returning gradually after a long period of illness. Their hours are stable. Their gross wage has not suddenly changed. The benefit still looks familiar. Yet the first payslip of 2027 shows a lower net amount.
The employer may have done everything correctly. That will not make the conversation easy.
The first Belastingdienst Nieuwsbrief Loonheffingen 2027, published on 19 August 2026, explains a payroll change taking effect on 1 January. Certain UWV benefits paid through an employer must then be treated differently when calculating the arbeidskorting, the employment tax credit. Affected employees will usually receive less net pay, while the employer faces no direct extra wage cost.
The change follows the Hoge Raad judgment of 15 November 2024, ECLI:NL:HR:2024:1657. The court found unjustified unequal treatment between comparable WGA recipients. Their tax outcome could differ depending on whether UWV paid the benefit directly or routed it through the employer.
The government chose to remove that difference by ending the employment tax credit on qualifying benefits paid through employers. Equal treatment is restored, but through a lower net outcome for the group that previously benefited from the payment route.
One payment, two income relationships
The difficult part is that an employee may still receive wages and a benefit together. From the outside, little appears to have changed. Inside payroll, the distinction becomes decisive.
The qualifying benefit must be recorded under a separate inkomstenverhouding, usually shortened to IKV. Current wages and the benefit are still combined for wage-tax withholding. Payroll must use the white table for current employment income and the green table for former employment income. The employment tax credit applies only to qualifying current wages.
The affected benefits include WAO, WAZ, Wajong, WIA benefits such as IVA and WGA, qualifying Ziektewet benefits, Wamil, BNO, WTV and a Toeslagenwet supplement. The rule also applies when an employer acts as an own-risk bearer. The payment route matters more than the label visible on a bank statement.
For a small business, this is where a narrow tax amendment enters human resources. Payroll software must recognise the two income relationships. UWV information must reach the right person. The payroll provider needs to understand how the payment is arranged. Someone must also explain the result without hiding behind tax terminology.
I read this primarily as a responsibility question. Outsourcing payroll moves the calculation, not the employer’s relationship with the employee. When the net figure falls, the employee will usually call the employer first, not the software supplier or the legislator.
Correct payroll can still damage trust
Consider a ten-person company with no HR department. One employee receives a partial WGA benefit through the monthly payroll. The founder knows about the return-to-work arrangement, the absence adviser knows the benefit history and the payroll bureau knows the codes. No single person holds the whole picture.
In January, the calculation is technically correct. The employee may still believe something has gone wrong. They may already be managing reduced working capacity and tighter household finances. A lower payment arriving without warning can feel less like tax consistency and more like an unexplained wage cut.
UWV explains that the individual effect depends on the benefit, current wages, tax-credit settings and the actual payroll calculation. The government estimated in March 2025 that approximately 11,000 benefit recipients would experience a financial effect, most with a full or partial occupational-disability benefit. That figure describes people, not employers.
The national number may look modest. Inside a small company, one affected employee is not a modest issue. Payroll is one of the clearest monthly signals of whether an employer is organised and dependable. A confusing payslip can weaken that confidence even when every amount is lawful.
Preparation belongs before the January payroll
The useful first question is simple: does the business currently pay any UWV benefit or Toeslagenwet supplement through its own payroll? Employers without an in-scope payment have no processing obligation under this specific change. Those with one affected case need a more deliberate handover.
A sensible review connects four pieces that are often kept apart: the UWV payment arrangement, the employee’s current wages, the payroll codes and the software configuration for 2027. The payroll provider should explain how two IKVs, two tables and one aggregated withholding calculation will work.
That explanation should reach the employee before the first changed payment. It does not need to predict an exact net amount too early, while the final 2027 rates are not yet available. It should make clear that the benefit entitlement and gross wage may remain unchanged while the employment tax credit is calculated differently.
There is a small but important governance point here. The company should retain the basis for its payroll setup and the explanation given to the employee. This is not defensive paperwork. It is a reliable account of who supplied the information, how the benefit was classified and why the net result changed.
The founder in our ten-person company cannot prevent the national rule. The founder can prevent the employee from discovering it alone at the kitchen table after opening a payslip.
That is the real HR task behind this tax change. The employer is not being asked to absorb a new levy. The task is to connect payroll accuracy with human timing. In January 2027, both will matter. A correct calculation settles the tax. A clear conversation protects the working relationship.
Want us to check your payroll process and employee message before the 2027 change?
The data, sourcing, and analysis behind this article were conducted by Paolo Maria Pavan. AI was not used to identify sources, build the factual basis, or produce the analytical judgment contained here. AI was used only as a drafting aid. The final English text was personally reviewed, edited, and approved by Paolo Maria Pavan before publication.
