Dation en paiement is a civil-law device: a debtor discharges a debt by delivering something other than money, provided the creditor agrees. Applied to inheritance tax, it lets heirs hand a work of art to the State instead of making a transfer. Belgium introduced it in 1985 for a practical reason — to stop major pieces leaving the country because a family had to sell them to pay the tax.
An heir may ask to settle all or part of Belgian inheritance tax by transferring a work of art or a cultural good to the State. In Brussels and Wallonia the basis is article 83-3 of the Inheritance Tax Code; in Flanders it is article 3.4.3.0.2 of the Flemish Tax Code, rewritten by the decree of 10 March 2023. The object must be of exceptional heritage significance, be held in full ownership, and the authority must accept the tender. Since 1 July 2023 Flanders values the object at 120 % of its market value.
The mismatch the regime addresses
Inheriting a valuable work creates a straightforward mismatch: the asset is illiquid, the tax is not. Walloon inheritance tax currently runs from 3 to 30 % in the direct line and reaches 80 % between unrelated persons. Flemish rates are 3, 9 and 27 % in the direct line, capped at 55 % for other beneficiaries. Applied to a piece with a thin secondary market, those percentages routinely force a sale — at the wrong moment, and often abroad.
The federal legislator answered with the Act of 1 August 1985, which inserted article 83-3 into the Inheritance Tax Code. That article was replaced by the Act of 21 June 2001 and supplemented by the Royal Decree of 26 August 2003, which sets the procedural rules and the treatment of valuation costs, read together with article 111 of the Belgian Income Tax Code. After regionalisation, those rules survive in the Brussels and Walloon versions of the Inheritance Tax Code, while Flanders first adopted and then rewrote the mechanism in its own Tax Code.
What Flanders changed on 1 July 2023
The decree of 10 March 2023 applies to deaths occurring from 1 July 2023 and moves three things.
Scope, first. The narrowly construed notion of work of art gave way to the broader notion of cultural good. Alongside painting and sculpture, archaeological finds, jewellery, manuscripts and scientific objects now qualify. The regime targets topstukken — objects that are rare and indispensable for the Flemish Community within the meaning of the decree of 24 January 2003 on the protection of movable cultural heritage of exceptional importance — and sleutelwerken, works that play a key role in the collections of Flemish museums and heritage institutions. Objects located abroad may also be tendered if they meet the conditions.
Valuation, second. Cultural goods tendered in payment are accepted at 120 % of their market value, fixed as at the date the estate opens. The 20 % uplift does not form part of the taxable base where the object itself belongs to the estate. A piece valued at €400,000 therefore extinguishes €480,000 of tax: paying by tender costs an heir 20 % less than paying in cash.
The debt covered, third. The Flemish regime no longer covers only the tax itself but also its accessories — surcharges, late-payment interest and administrative fines. Where the uplifted value exceeds the amount due, the balance can be refunded, which the older regime does not provide for.
| Element | Brussels · Wallonia | Flanders since 1 July 2023 |
|---|---|---|
| Eligible objects | Recognised works of art | Cultural goods: art, jewellery, manuscripts, archaeology, scientific objects |
| Value retained | 100 % of open-market value | 120 % of market value |
| Debt covered | Inheritance tax | Tax, surcharges, interest, fines |
| Surplus | Not refunded | Refund possible |
| Advisory body | Special commission (art. 83-4) | Topstukkenraad, binding advice |
Full ownership: where most files fail
This is usually the decisive point. The objects tendered must belong in their entirety and in full ownership to the deceased, to the surviving spouse or legal cohabitant, or to the heirs, legatees or donees. That requirement rules out a number of situations that estate planning itself created.
A collection held by a legal entity — a private foundation, a civil partnership, a patrimonial company — fails the ownership test if that entity is not named as a legatee in the deceased's will. A split between usufruct and bare ownership raises the same difficulty, since full ownership is required. A structure set up for entirely different reasons can therefore close off the tender route without anyone having anticipated it.
A second limit is less visible. The tender is not a taxpayer's right but the outcome of an agreement between debtor and creditor, and the tax authority retains discretion over the offer. An heir cannot build a funding plan for the tax on the assumption that the tender will be accepted.
Testing eligibility during your lifetime
This is the most usable consequence of the Flemish reform. The holder of a cultural good may file an advance request with the Topstukkenraad before death, to have it examined whether the object would qualify. The council rules on the category the object belongs to and on its value, and issues binding advice to the Flemish Government.
Knowing in advance whether a piece will be accepted moves the question from guesswork to arithmetic. The collector can then choose on informed terms: keep the piece and prepare the tender, gift it during their lifetime at the regional movable-gift rate, or take it out of the estate by another route. Without that check, the heirs only discover whether the mechanism is available once the filing deadline is already running.
What the regime does not solve
It remains available to a small number of files. It targets objects of exceptional heritage importance, not good private collections. A contemporary collection assembled over twenty years and worth several hundred thousand euros will as a rule stand no chance of recognition as a topstuk or as a work of international renown. Its transmission runs through other instruments: a registered movable gift, a considered ownership structure, an arbitrage between private wealth and a company.
There is also a price. The piece leaves the family permanently and enters the public domain. For a collector who wants the works to stay within the family, the tender is not an alternative to transmission — it is an alternative to a forced sale.
Finally, the arithmetic is shifting. The Walloon decree of 5 December 2024 halves the top rates for deaths occurring from 1 January 2028: a maximum of 15 % in the direct line instead of 30 %, and a 15 to 40 % band between unrelated persons instead of 30 to 80 %. The allowance for the direct line, the spouse and the legal cohabitant rises from €12,500 to €25,000. In Flanders, the surviving partner's allowance on movable assets has moved from €50,000 to €75,000 since 1 January 2026. A file built on today's rates deserves a second reading against that timetable.
In practice
Three questions decide whether the mechanism is usable in a given file. The region the deceased is fiscally attached to, which determines which regime applies and whether the 120 % valuation is available. The actual heritage standing of the piece, which is tested with the competent body rather than estimated by intuition. And the chain of ownership, which must end in full ownership held by the deceased or their successors on the date of death.
Those three points are examined before death, on documents. Afterwards, the filing deadline leaves little room to assemble a valuation file and obtain an opinion.
If your estate includes works whose transmission is not yet organised, a first confidential meeting will map the options genuinely available in your configuration — with no commitment.