Parliamentary Developments On Dutch Rent Regulation: Some Silver Linings For Residential Investors

The Dutch investment climate for private landlords and housing associations is under pressure. As a result of the introduction of the Affordable Rent Act (Wet betaalbare huur), changes in the fiscal framework and rising interest rates, the playing field for investors in (mid‑market) rental housing has changed significantly. In particular in the major cities, the current situation has led to a large number of (mid‑market) rental properties being sold off, while for investors it has become increasingly challenging to make the business case viable.

In order to maintain the supply of rental housing, the Minister for Housing and Spatial Planning announced five measures in a letter dated 20 April 2026, ahead of a more comprehensive evaluation of the Affordable Rent Act scheduled for the first half of 2027. These measures are outlined below.

The proposed measures

The first measure concerns an adjustment to the WOZ cap. First, a brief recap of the background to this cap. In order to allow the location of a dwelling to be reflected in the points total (and thus in the rent), the WOZ value became a substantial component of the WWS valuation of rental properties in 2015, replacing the previously applicable “housing type” and “housing environment” points. As the WOZ value increased sharply over the past ten years and therefore became increasingly decisive in the number of WWS points, the share of the WOZ value in the WWS valuation has been capped at 33% since 2022. The objective was to prevent properties from falling into the liberalised segment solely due to a high WOZ value.

Currently, where a rental property falls below 187 points as a result of the WOZ cap, it qualifies as mid‑market rent and may be let at the rent corresponding to 186 points. The first proposed measure now aims to soften this cap. It introduces a WOZ price surcharge, meaning that for such a property the maximum rent will correspond to the number of points the property would have had without the WOZ cap. For example, a property that would have scored 200 WWS points without the cap will still qualify as mid‑market rent, but may be let at the rent corresponding to 200 WWS points. As of today, this represents a surcharge of EUR 96.11 (the difference between EUR 1,228.07 for 186 points and EUR 1,324.18 for 200 points).

For several years now, market participants have advocated either abolishing the WOZ cap entirely or increasing it. The Minister proposes an alternative form of relief through the WOZ price surcharge. This approach does not make the overall set of rules any simpler. At the same time, increasing or abolishing the WOZ cap altogether would have much more far‑reaching consequences, because, as the example above illustrates, the surcharge will in practice likely be (significantly) lower than the difference in rent that could be charged if the property were to fall within the liberalised segment. This measure therefore offers landlords some additional room, but only time will tell whether it will truly reverse the current wave of sales.

The second proposed measure relates to outdoor space. Under the current WWS, rental properties without outdoor space receive a deduction of five points. As creating outdoor space is not always feasible, particularly in major cities, the Minister proposes to abolish these penalty points.

The third proposed measure aims to give greater weight to the WOZ value of small listed monuments (up to 40 m²), which are often highly sought after due to their favourable location. How this will be implemented in practice is not yet clear.

Under the current regulations, landlords may enter into temporary lease agreements with students coming from another municipality or from abroad. As private landlords of student housing tend in practice to prefer temporary agreements, students from the same municipality are disadvantaged. The fourth proposed measure makes it possible to conclude temporary lease agreements with these students as well.

According to the Minister, these four measures primarily offer relief to (private) landlords of existing housing stock. The intention is to introduce them as of 1 January 2027 (or earlier if possible).

In addition to existing housing, the Minister notes that the construction of new mid‑market rental housing also requires attention. Since the entry into force of the Affordable Rent Act, a new‑build surcharge of 10% applies for a period of 20 years after completion for mid‑market rental properties whose construction commenced before 1 January 2028. Due to the ongoing shortage of such housing, the Minister has decided, as a fifth measure, to extend this new‑build surcharge by four years, until 1 January 2032.

Two points of attention

The concrete implementation of the measures is not yet known. However, we would already like to highlight the following points:

• We do not see a statutory basis for applying the proposed optimisations to existing lease agreements. This would mean that the announced measures will offer relief only in the context of entering into a new lease agreement.
• Assuming that the WOZ price surcharge is added to Article 8a of the Rent Prices Decree for Residential Accommodation (Besluit huurprijzen woonruimte), which already contains the existing (listed monument) surcharge and the new‑build surcharge, we expect that multiple surcharges may not be applied cumulatively. Pursuant to paragraph 7 of this article, each surcharge must be applied to the maximum rent permitted under the WWS system. In practice, this means that for a new‑build mid‑market rental property benefiting from the WOZ surcharge of EUR 96.11 in our example, the 10% new‑build surcharge would not also apply to this amount. It would arguably be logical for this to be possible, so the Minister may still take this into account when implementing the measures.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.