Key global mobility tax and compliance updates

Global mobility brings a range of tax, employment and social security considerations for employers managing an internationally mobile workforce. Requirements vary between countries and continue to evolve.

Our global mobility international update covers key developments from around the world. It explains what these mean for employers and highlights practical considerations for managing international assignments and cross-border working.

Key global mobility updates from around the RSM network

Updates from RSM member firms highlighting recent changes across key mobility jurisdictions.

Insight contributed by RSM Australia - Rick Kimberley

Wage underpayments, director liability, Australian tax residence and the treatment of workers engaged through intermediaries continue to present significant payroll, tax and employment risks for employers. Developments affecting portable long service leave, electric vehicle salary packaging and employee share plans also create new compliance obligations. Understanding where exposure may arise can help employers take action before issues become costly.

Read our October update: Global Employer Services Update | October 2026

Proposed superannuation reforms for younger workers, developments in Payday Super and workplace regulation, could create new compliance challenges for employers. Ongoing court and enforcement activity are also increasing potential exposure for employers and directors. Understanding the effects will be important for payroll, labour hire, contractor arrangements and compliance planning.

Read our September update: Global Employer Services Update | September 2026

Australia’s employment tax and payroll landscape is changing rapidly. Payday Super reforms, new ATO guidance, significant payroll tax decisions and tougher wage enforcement could have important implications on payroll governance, contractor arrangements and superannuation compliance. Understanding the risks now will help employers assess their exposure and identify any action that may be required.

Read our August update: Global Employer Services Update | August 2026

Insight contributed by RSM Belgium – Tuur Van Hoof

Employers with Belgian employees participating in group incentive plans may need to revisit the Belgian social security treatment of those arrangements. This follows a recent judgment from the Belgian Court of Cassation.

The judgment of 29 June 2026 provides important clarification on the social security treatment of benefits granted by a foreign parent company to employees of a Belgian subsidiary.

The Court adopted a broad interpretation of what constitutes remuneration granted in consideration for work. This may significantly reduce the scope for arguing that benefits granted directly by a parent company are not subject to Belgian social security contributions. This includes benefits such as restricted stock units (RSUs).

What the ruling means for employee incentive plans

• Benefits granted to retain employees, encourage commitment or promote the faithful performance of duties can qualify as consideration for work.
• Such benefits therefore constitute salary subject to Belgian social security contributions.
• This can apply even where a foreign parent company grants and funds the benefit, rather than the Belgian employer.
• The judgment makes it more difficult to argue that parent-company benefits are based on a separate cause unrelated to the employee work.
• Multinational groups should reassess the Belgian social security treatment of group-level incentive plans involving Belgian employees.

How the case involved RSUs and Belgian social security contributions

The case concerned RSUs awarded by a US parent company to employees of two Belgian group companies under a group-level incentive plan.

The parent company decided which employees qualified for the RSUs and bore the related costs. The Belgian companies were neither a party to nor an intermediary in the grants.

The RSUs were intended to bind employees to the group over the longer term.

Following social security inspections, the Belgian National Social Security Office (NSSO), claimed social security contributions on the RSUs.

Why the Court ruled RSUs can be subject to Belgian social security contributions

The key question was whether the RSUs constituted consideration for the work performed by the employees and therefore qualified as salary for Belgian social security purposes.

The Court of Cassation held that benefits granted, with a view to binding employees to the undertaking, can constitute consideration for work.

Importantly, the Court's judgment confirms that a benefit may qualify as remuneration for Belgian social security purposes. This applies irrespective of whether it is granted by the Belgian employer itself or by a third party.

The mere fact that a foreign parent company grants and funds a benefit does not, in itself, mean that no Belgian social security contributions are due.

The Court therefore overturned the previous ruling of the Antwerp Labour Court. The case has now been referred to the Brussels Labour Court.

What does this mean for employers?

The judgment considerably narrows the practical scope for treating benefits granted by a foreign parent company as separate from the Belgian employment relationship.

For multinational groups operating incentive plans, a benefit is granted and funded exclusively by a foreign parent company may still be considered salary. It could therefore be subject to Belgian social security contributions.

Belgian employers should consequently review RSUs and other benefits granted to Belgian employees under group-level incentive plans. This is particularly relevant where those benefits are intended to reward performance, retain employees or encourage their commitment.

Following this judgement, employers should review incentive plans involving Belgian employees to assess whether Belgian social security contributions may apply. They should seek advice to assess potential exposure and determine the appropriate treatment.

Insight by RSM France – Jerome Regnier

Who is eligible and what has changed?

The French ‘impatriate tax regime’ is a tax incentive designed to attract highly skilled workers to France. It provides a range of benefits and tax breaks for foreign workers who relocate to France for employment purposes.

The French tax authorities have recently refined their published guidance on the impatriate regime. This brings certainty for employers and affected employees. It applies whether they are returning to France after a period abroad or joining from overseas.

French tax residency requirements

To be eligible, an individual must:

• Become a French tax resident under at least one of the French domestic residency criteria. This includes living with their family in France or having a permanent home in France. Other factors are carrying out professional activities in France or having their centre of economic interests in France.
• Move to France for professional reasons rather than personal convenience.
• Not have been a French tax resident during the five prior years before their arrival.

To qualify for the regime, an individual must become a French tax resident and satisfy the five-year non-residence condition. The move to France must also be driven by employment rather than personal reasons.

Who can qualify for the impatriate tax regime?

The individual must be either a qualifying corporate officer or employee of a French company or French permanent establishment.

Qualifying corporate officers include a président-directeur général of a French SAS and other board directors.

How employees can qualify through recruitment or transfer

Recruitment

The French tax administration has confirmed that the regime applies to a French company recruits an individual from outside France.

This year, the French tax administration formally confirmed that the scheme only applies where an individual relocates to France after accepting a French job offer. An individual must therefore not move to France before accepting the role.

Transfer

The regime was initially introduced to employees on intragroup assignments to France. It can apply whether the employee has a French employment contract, provided they continue to work within the same group.

The regime may continue to apply where an employee changes role or grade within the same group.

The 2026 Tax Administration Doctrine also confirmed the scheme can be used by repatriated employees, provided they meet the other conditions. Employers should confirm eligibility before an employee relocates to France and checkwhether the individual is joining from overseas, transferring within a group or returning to France.

Insight contributed by RSM Netherlands – Brian James

Dutch 30% ruling – preparing for change

Employers with employees benefiting from the current 30%-ruling must be prepared for changes to this regime as of 1 January 2027.

How the 30% ruling works

Under the current regime, qualifying inbound employees to the Netherlands can, in principle, have up to 30% of their salary from current employment paid tax free. This is paid as a fixed allowance to cover the additional costs of working in the Netherlands. The maximum tax-free amount is €78.6k (2026) and the maximum duration of the regulation is five years.

30%-ruling reduced to 27% from January 2027

As of 1 January 2027, the fixed percentage will drop from 30% to 27%. This lower percentage will apply not only to new cases as of 1 January 2027. will also apply for employees that were granted the 30%-ruling on 1 January 2024 or later.

Transitional measures for the 30% rate

Transitional measures are in place for employees that were making use of the 30%-ruling before 1 January 2024. These employees can in principle continue to make use of the 30% rate until their 30%-ruling runs out.

Higher salary thresholds from 2027

To qualify for the 30%-ruling, employees must meet certain salary thresholds. For 2026, this was set at €48,013. A lower threshold of € 36,497 applies for qualifying Dutch master’s degree graduates under the age of 30 (‘young masters’).

For employees that were granted a 30%-ruling on or after 1 January 2025, higher salary thresholds will apply from 1 January 2027. The general threshold is expected to be €50,436 with the threshold for young masters to be €38,388.

Salary threshold transitional measures

For employees that were making use of the 30%-ruling in 2024, the salary thresholds remain and will be indexed according to current practice.

Partial non-resident status ends on 31 December 2026

On 31 December 2026, the transitional measure for partial non-resident status will come to an end.

This means that employees still benefitting from partial non-resident taxpayer status, will be treated as full resident taxpayers of the Netherlands from 1 January 2027. These employees will become taxable on their worldwide income from substantial shareholdings, which are taxed under Box 2 of the Dutch tax system. They will also become taxable on income from savings and investments, which fall under Box 3.

Impact on net salary and tax equalisation arrangements

For employers that have employees in the Netherlands on net salary or tax equalisation agreements, these changes will mean an increased tax liability in the Netherlands.

Actions employers should take before January 2027

Given the upcoming changes, employers should review employees benefitting from the 30%-ruling and how they will be affected. Employers should also check current payroll processes, particularly the lower threshold and applicable salary caps. In addition, a further check for employees on net or tax equalised agreements should be carried out.

Review your work cost regulation before year-end

As year-end approaches, it is a good time to review the tax treatment of employee expenses and benefits under the work-cost regulation (WKR).

Under the WKR, employers can designate expenses and benefits paid to and for employees. If these expenses do not fall under a designated exemption or a nil-valuation (ie are non-taxable), they can be allocated to the so-called tax-exempt space.

This tax-exempt space is 2% of up to € 400k the company’s taxable wage sum for all employees and 1.18% for the taxable wage sum above € 400k

Final-levy tax

If expenses and benefits allocated to this space exceeds the tax-exempt amount, a final 80% level applies at employer level. If any final-levy tax is due, it must be reported and paid with the February payroll tax return in the following year. For example, the final-levy tax on expenses and benefits allocated in 2026 must be reported and paid by 31 March 2027.

What employers should do now

A year-end review gives employers the opportunity to identify tax risks and opportunities associated with employee expenses and benefits schemes. It also allows any necessary adjustments to be made before year-end.

Insight contributed by RSM Switzerland – Augustin de la Chapelle

The reform of the EU social security coordination rules is the most significant update to European social security coordination in years. It introduces new compliance requirements for employers managing internationally mobile workers.

While the fundamental principles remain unchanged, the reform introduces stricter posting rules and tighter A1 certificate procedures. For the first time, it also provides a formal definition of business travel that may remove the need for A1 certificates in certain short-term situations.

For organisations with cross-border workforces, the changes create both opportunities and challenges. Employers will need to strengthen mobility planning, day-tracking and documentation processes, while closely monitoring how and when Switzerland adopts the reforms. With potentially significant implications for postings, frequent business travellers and employees working across multiple countries, understanding the detail of the reforms will be essential.

Both Switzerland and the UK have separate agreements with the EU that closely mirror (but do not match) the EU rules. Time will tell if both countries decide to match the procedural changes being implemented by the EU.

Read the full article: EU social security reform and mobility | RSM Switzerland

Insight contributed by RSM UK – Ian Jones

As senior leaders become increasingly internationally mobile, cross-border working is creating a wider and more complex range of tax and compliance risks for UK businesses. Non-UK resident directors may trigger PAYE obligations where they perform UK directorship duties. This can apply even if they attend only one UK board meeting or receive their remuneration through another group company.

National Insurance requires a separate assessment of social security agreements, certificates of coverage and the treatment of directors in other jurisdictions. The position can become particularly complicated where an individual combines a UK directorship with wider regional or global responsibilities.

Complexity can also arise where salary, benefits and expenses must be apportioned between UK and overseas duties. With HMRC able to compare payroll records against board minutes, travel data, expenses, calendars and internal communications, errors or assumptions may be easy to identify.

The risks extend well beyond payroll. Directors and senior executives working from overseas homes may create permanent establishment exposure. This depends on how much time they spend there and whether there is a business reason for the arrangement. Overseas activity may also affect corporate residence, treaty residence, transfer pricing and local filing requirements. It may also raise employment law, immigration, social security, regulatory, health and safety, and data protection considerations.

Businesses therefore need a joined-up approach. This should map where senior personnel work, where strategic decisions are made, who negotiates or concludes contracts, and how remuneration is allocated. The OECD’s updated commentary can help businesses assess remote-working risks. It explains why the 50% working-time indicator is not a safe harbour, the practical actions to strengthen governance and maintain defensible evidence.

Read the full article here: Cross-border working: tax risks for senior leaders

Insight contributed by RSM US – Dorothy Celeste

Having a non-resident individual serve on the board of a US corporation can create US tax considerations for both the individual and the company.

The tax treatment generally depends on the type and location of the services and whether the individual is acting as a director or an employee. It may also be affected by an exemption or relief available under a tax treaty or the social security agreement.

Why the type of services matters

The first step is to determine the type of services the individual performs. A board member may perform both board duties and operational or managerial services for the company. These services may have different US tax and reporting requirements.

• Board services – these generally include attending board meetings, participating in governance activities and performing other duties as a board member. Compensation for these services is generally treated as payment for independent board services.
• Operational and managerial services – a board member may also perform operational, managerial, or other services as an employee of the company. Compensation for these services should generally be separated from the director’s board fees.

If an individual performs both board and employee services, the compensation should be divided based on the actual services performed and the individual’s contractual arrangements. This distinction is important because board fees and employee compensation may be subject to different US tax and reporting rules.

How the location of services affects tax treatment

Under the US tax rules, compensation for personal services is generally sourced based on where the services are physically performed.

• Compensation attributable to board meetings and other director services, performed in the United States, are considered US-source and are subject to US taxation.
• Compensation attributable to board meetings and other director services, performed outside the United States, are considered foreign source for a non-resident individual.

For example, a director may reside in the United Kingdom, attend board meetings and provide governance advice for a US company from the United Kingdom. Compensation paid for those services would generally be foreign source compensation under the US sourcing rules.

If the same director travels to the United States to attend meetings or perform other board-related duties, different sourcing would apply. Compensation attributable to services physically performed in the United States would generally be treated as US source.

Where services are performed partly within and partly outside the United States, the payment must be allocated under the facts and circumstances. A time-based allocation is often an acceptable approach.

US income tax withholding and reporting requirements

Employee compensation and independent contractor compensation can be subject to different reporting requirements.

• Board-meeting compensation: compensation paid to a non-resident director for attending board meetings in the United States is generally subject to 30% US federal tax withholding, unless reduced or exempt under the treaty. The payment may need to be reported on Form 1042 and 1042-S.

• Where treaty relief is available, the director generally must provide completed Form 8233 to the withholding agent to claim an applicable treaty withholding exemption.

• Compensation for services performed as an employee: compensation for operational, managerial, or other services performed in an employment capacity is generally treated as employee compensation rather than director's fees. It is subject to graduated withholdings rates, unless reduced or exempt under the treaty.

• Income tax treaties: an applicable US income tax treaty may reduce or eliminate US tax on compensation paid to non-resident directors. The treaty treatment generally depends on the type of services performed, rather than the individual’s corporate title.

  • The directors’ fees article generally applies to fees and similar payments received for services performed as a member of a company’s board of directors.
  • Compensation for operational, managerial, or other executive services is analysed under the treaty’s employment article.

This distinction is important when an individual performs both board services and operational employee services.

• State and local tax considerations: a non-resident director who travels to the US to attend a board meeting or perform other services may also be subject to state and local tax withholdings and reporting. This depends on where the services are performed and the rules of the applicable jurisdiction.

Social Security and Medicare treatment

The US Social Security and Medicare taxation also depends on the capacity in which the individual performs services.

• Board-meeting fees: fees for attending board meetings and performing other board duties are generally treated as self-employment income. A non-resident alien is generally exempt from self-employment tax, except to the extent an applicable social security totalisation agreement provides otherwise.
• Employee services: compensation for operational, managerial, or other services performed as an employee is generally subject to US Social Security and Medicare taxes. However, an applicable social security totalisation agreement between the United States and the individual’s home country may provide an exemption from these taxes.

Businesses should therefore distinguish between board and employee services, identify where each service is physically performed and check whether treaty or social security relief is available.

For more information on how these global mobility and tax developments could impact your organisation, speak to Joanne Webber for tailored advice across your international workforce.

Latest related insights