- Status
- Judgment entered (judgment)
- As of
- 22 Mar 2018 · read from the court record
- Court
- Grondwettelijk Hof / Cour constitutionnelle · Supreme or high court
- Docket
- rolnummers 6564, 6567, 6576, 6577, 6579, 6584
- Filed
- Dec 2016
- Type
- Constitutional challenge, gambling tax litigation
- Money
- arts. 29-34 annulled; effects maintained (tax collected since 1 July 2016 not refunded)
- Payout
- No payout exists as of 14 Nov 2026
Status words follow the court record: a complaint states one side's allegations, only the court's orders decide anything. Filing a settlement claim is always free.
What this case is about
Belgium abolished the VAT exemption for online gambling (except lotteries) from 1 July 2016. The Constitutional Court annulled the provisions on 22 March 2018 for breach of the division of competences but maintained their effects. The legislature re-enacted the tax, leading to the CJEU judgments of 12 September 2024 in Casino de Spa (C-741/22) and Chaudfontaine Loisirs (C-73/23).
What this case is about
Arrest 34/2018 of the Belgian Constitutional Court (Grondwettelijk Hof), delivered on 22 March 2018 in joined cases 6564, 6567, 6576, 6577, 6579 and 6584, annulled the VAT on online gambling that Belgium introduced on 1 July 2016.
The cases were filed from December 2016 and sought annulment of arts. 29 to 34 of the programmawet of 1 July 2016, which removed the VAT exemption for online games of chance other than lotteries.
The Court annulled the provisions for breach of the division of competences. The ruling is one of the key decisions in Gambling Tax Litigation.
Who is covered
The applicants were casino and gaming businesses: Casinos Austria International Belgium nv, Blancas, Middelkerke Casino Kursaal, Casino Kursaal Oostende and Grand Casino de Dinant. The Walloon Government, Reel Europe Ltd and Pac-Man, Sagevas, Star Matic and Unibet (Belgium) Ltd, and Rocoluc also brought cases.
The defendant was the Belgian State, represented by the Council of Ministers (Ministerraad). The ruling affected operators of online games of chance other than lotteries, and the state's other disputes are on Belgian State (Ministerraad) Lawsuits.
Is there a payout?
No payout exists in this case. The Court annulled arts. 29 to 34 but maintained their effects, so the tax collected since 1 July 2016 was not refunded.
There is no fund, claim form or administrator. The ruling gave operators no repayment, and the money fields in the record are zero.
What the court decided
The Constitutional Court annulled arts. 29 to 34 of the programmawet on 22 March 2018 for breach of the division of competences. It maintained the effects of the annulled provisions.
The legislature then re-enacted the tax. That led to two CJEU judgments of 12 September 2024: Casino de Spa (C-741/22) and Chaudfontaine Loisirs (C-73/23).
As of 14 November 2026 the 2018 arrest is a decided matter and no later step in this docket is recorded. For the country's wider caseload, see Gambling Lawsuits in Belgium.
Why it matters
The decision shows that a tax can fall on procedural grounds, here the allocation of powers, even when the Court leaves the money in the state's hands. It came before the Belgian VAT cases that later reached the EU level.
For how gambling-related payments are treated by tax authorities, see Are Gambling Settlement Payments Taxable?.
Related cases
- C-741/22 Casino de Spa SA and Others v État belge, judgment of 12 September 2024 is the CJEU judgment on the re-enacted tax.
- C-73/23 Chaudfontaine Loisirs SA v État belge, judgment of 12 September 2024 is the second CJEU judgment of the same day.
Questions people ask
Did Belgium have to refund the online gambling VAT?
No. The Court maintained the effects of the annulled provisions, so tax collected since 1 July 2016 was not refunded.
Why did the Constitutional Court annul the VAT?
It found a breach of the division of competences. The annulment concerned arts. 29 to 34 of the programmawet of 1 July 2016.
Is there a settlement claim for this ruling?
No. No settlement or fund exists. Filing a settlement claim is free wherever one exists, and GamblingLawsuits.org is not a law firm and not a claims administrator.
Who is involved
Plaintiffs: nv Casinos Austria International Belgium, Blancas, Middelkerke Casino Kursaal, Casino Kursaal Oostende, Grand Casino de Dinant; Waalse Regering; Reel Europe Ltd and Pac-Man; Sagevas; Star Matic and Unibet (Belgium) Ltd; Rocoluc
| Defendants | Belgian State (Ministerraad) |
|---|---|
| Claims |
|
Is there a payout?
No payout exists in this case as of 14 Nov 2026. The court record shows arts. 29-34 annulled; effects maintained (tax collected since 1 July 2016 not refunded).
What happens next
No future date is on the record we hold. The case is closed on the record we hold; later appeals or enforcement steps would be added here.
Timeline
2 dated steps on record, oldest first. Future dates come from court notices and can move.
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Dec 2016 | Filed |
| 22 Mar 2018 | Judgment entered |
Documents and sources
1 primary source (court file, administrator notice, regulator) and 0 secondary. Press is supporting evidence only.
- Court document: nl.const-court.be
| What it supports | Source | Type | Retrieved |
|---|---|---|---|
| arrest 34/2018, 22 March 2018, parties, annulment with maintained effects | nl.const-court.be | primary | 14 Nov 2026 |
Related cases
2 cases in the record share parties, claims or a settlement with this one.
| Case | Court | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Casino de Spa: Belgium may tax online gambling with VAT while exempting lotteries and land-based games | Court of Justice of the European Union (referral from Tribunal de première instance de Liège) | Judgment entered |
| Chaudfontaine Loisirs: VAT on online casino games compatible with EU law | Court of Justice of the European Union (referral from Tribunal de première instance de Liège) | Judgment entered |
Last checked against the sources on 14 Nov 2026. Found an error? Tell us and we correct the record with a dated note.