Monday – Friday | 09:00 – 18:00
Knowledge Series · India Tax & Treaties

Netherlands holding company or Luxembourg for India: should a European parent hold its Indian subsidiary directly?

ATB Knowledge Series · 12 min read · Published October 2026

Short answer: For most German, French, Swiss, Swedish and Finnish groups, holding the Indian subsidiary directly is the better default: their own treaties already give India's 10% dividend rate, the same rate a Dutch or Luxembourg holding company gets. A Netherlands holding company is worth its cost mainly on exit, because India generally cannot tax its sale of Indian shares to a non-Indian buyer, saving 13.0%–13.65% of the gain if the company has the substance to pass India's anti-abuse tests. A Luxembourg holding company gives no exit relief, and either holding company cuts dividend tax only for parents that face 15% when they hold directly, such as Belgian and Spanish groups.

Who this is for: CFOs, group tax heads and general counsel of European groups deciding, or reviewing, where their Indian subsidiary sits.

Holding India directly: what your own treaty already gives you

Parent holds directly from India's dividend withholding (treaty) Can India tax the parent's gain on Indian shares?
Germany, Switzerland, Finland 10% Yes
France 10% Yes, for a holding of at least 10%
Sweden 10% Assume yes (India may tax a gain Sweden exempts, as it usually does)
Belgium, Spain 15% Yes, for a holding of at least 10%
Italy 15% for a holding of 10% or more (25% below 10%, capped at the domestic rate) Yes
Denmark 15% for a holding of 25% or more (25% below 25%, capped at the domestic rate) Yes, for a holding of at least 10%
Dutch holding company 10% Generally no (see below)
Luxembourg holding company 10% Yes

Sources: [1]–[5]. Rates for every payment type are in India withholding tax rates 2026 and how to repatriate profits; the wider comparison, including the UAE and Singapore, is in Invest in India: choosing a holding company jurisdiction (hub).

France's position is set to change. A protocol signed in February 2026, approved by the French Council of Ministers on 16 September 2026 and now before the French Senate, but not yet in force, cuts India's dividend rate to 5% for a French company holding at least 10% and lets India tax all gains on Indian shares [6]. Under the French government's impact study, those dividend and gains changes start two years later than the rest of the protocol [6]. A French parent holding 10% or more would then do better directly than through a Dutch or Luxembourg holding company: after Nestle (Supreme Court, 2023), the Dutch most-favoured-nation clause gives no lower rate without an Indian notification [7].

Netherlands holding company: what the exit exemption covers and what it does not

Under Article 13(5) of the India–Netherlands treaty, a gain on shares is taxable only in the seller's state of residence. India keeps the right to tax only where a Dutch company holding at least 10% of an Indian company sells shares to an Indian resident, and even then not if the sale is part of a corporate reorganisation, amalgamation or division where the buyer or seller owns at least 10% of the other [1]. Dutch-parented groups have this treaty without an extra layer; see the Netherlands–India corridor page.

Five limits matter:

  1. The buyer. A taxable sale to an Indian resident bears 13.0%–13.65% on unlisted shares held over 24 months [8], so the exemption suits a sale to a foreign buyer. Even then, the buyer must withhold Indian tax from the price unless the Dutch company obtains a nil-withholding certificate (Form 128, s.395) before completion [9].
  2. Property-rich companies. India may tax where the Indian company's value comes principally from Indian immovable property and the Dutch company holds 25% or more (Article 13(4)) [1].
  3. The anti-abuse rules. The principal purpose test (PPT) has applied since 1 April 2020 on the Income Tax Department's view, though a 2025 Mumbai Tribunal ruling in an Irish case held that a separate notification is needed, and the point is not settled [1][10][11]. India's general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR) and the Tiger Global reasoning apply regardless; GAAR applies only where the aggregate tax benefit to all parties exceeds INR 3 crore in a tax year (Rule 128, Income-tax Rules 2026), but the PPT has no such floor [12].
  4. Selling the Dutch company instead. A parent that sells the Dutch BV makes an indirect transfer of the Indian shares, taxable in India under section 9(10) where the Indian assets exceed INR 10 crore and form at least 50% of the BV's assets, and its own treaty applies, not the Dutch one [13]. The exemption protects a sale by the Dutch company, not a sale of it.
  5. Renegotiation. India removed similar residence-only clauses from its Mauritius, Singapore and Cyprus treaties for shares acquired from April 2017 [11]; treat the Dutch exemption as valuable but not permanent.

Buy-backs. Since 1 April 2026 India taxes buy-backs as capital gains; Huntsman (Delhi Tribunal, 25 March 2026) treated an intra-group buy-back from a Dutch holder as a reorganisation taxable only in the Netherlands, though a 2016 Mumbai ruling differs [14][15].

Luxembourg holding company (SOPARFI): same dividend rate, no exit relief

The India–Luxembourg treaty (in force 2009) caps India's withholding at 10% on dividends, interest, royalties and fees for technical services [16]; the usual holding vehicle is a SOPARFI, an ordinary, fully taxable Luxembourg company. Three points set the treaty apart from the Dutch one:

  • India taxes share gains (Article 13(5)), so a Luxembourg holding company pays the same 13.0%–13.65% as a German or Swiss parent [16].
  • A principal purpose test. On the Income Tax Department's synthesised text, the MLI's test replaces the treaty's own 2008 main-purpose test in Article 29; if the Tribunal view that a separate notification is needed prevails, the 2008 test still applies, and either catches a company created mainly to obtain the treaty [10][16][17].
  • Special regimes are excluded. Article 30 denies the treaty to companies with special Luxembourg tax treatment: the former 1929 holding companies and "other companies that enjoy a similar special fiscal treatment". An ordinary SOPARFI is not caught; a fund vehicle under a special regime may be, and a vehicle not itself taxable in Luxembourg is not a treaty resident at all, so funds should hold India through a fully taxable SOPARFI and take Luxembourg advice on the vehicle above it [16].

Unlike the Dutch treaty, whose protocol can import a "make available" limit through its most-favoured-nation clause, the Luxembourg technical-fees definition has none: management charges routed through Luxembourg bear 10% Indian withholding [1][16].

Dutch and Luxembourg holding company tax: participation exemption and onward dividends

Netherlands (BV) Luxembourg (SOPARFI)
Indian dividends and gains Exempt at 5% or more, unless a portfolio holding (an Indian company taxed at about 25% is not) [18] Exempt at 10%, or a cost of EUR 1.2m (dividends) or EUR 6m (gains), held 12 months [19][20]
Dividends on to an EU, EEA, Swiss or treaty-country parent 0% (otherwise 15%) at 5% or more, unless the arrangement is artificial and mainly aimed at avoiding another person's tax [21][22] 0% (otherwise 15%) at 10% held for 12 months [19][20]
Other levies 25.8% conditional withholding only for affiliates in listed low-tax jurisdictions (no EU country, Switzerland or the UAE) or abusive arrangements [21][23] Minimum net wealth tax of EUR 4,815 a year above a EUR 2m balance sheet [24]

EU rules and Pillar Two add little: the anti-avoidance directive's controlled-foreign-company rules do not catch an Indian subsidiary taxed at about 25% [25], "Unshell" was abandoned in 2025 [26], and the global minimum tax adds compliance, not tax [27].

What substance a Dutch or Luxembourg holding company needs

The first test is residence itself. A BV or SOPARFI whose decisions are taken at the parent's head office can be resident in the parent's country under the tie-breaker in that country's treaty with the Netherlands or Luxembourg (the 2012 Germany–Netherlands treaty, for example, looks to the place of effective management) [28]. It may then be unable to give India a Dutch or Luxembourg residence certificate, and the exemption falls away before any anti-abuse test is reached.

Since Tiger Global (15 January 2026), India looks behind the tax residency certificate at where decisions are taken and by whom [29]; see substance after Azadi Bachao and Tiger Global. A holding company India will respect shows real board decisions in its own country by resident directors who understand the Indian business, a local bank mandate, office space, genuine spending and a documented commercial reason. It must also be the beneficial owner of what it receives, free to keep or reinvest the Indian dividends rather than bound to pass them up [1][16]. Nor should the board sit in India: a foreign company whose place of effective management is in India is an Indian resident, taxed there on its worldwide income (s.6(10), Income-tax Act 2025) [30].

Dutch practice publishes the indicators it uses: at least half the board with decision-making power resident in the Netherlands, decisions taken and books kept there and, for some companies, their own office, staff and main bank account. A company that meets them shifts the burden of proving abuse to the Dutch tax authority, and the same file serves it in India [31]. The tax residency certificate and Form 41 are covered in Form 10F (now Form 41) and tax residency certificate.

Investment treaty protection: neither adds cover for new money

The India–Netherlands BIT ended on 1 December 2016 and the Belgium–Luxembourg BIT on 22 March 2017: earlier investments keep cover to 2031 and 2032, new money has none [32][33][34], and the EU–India investment protection agreement is still under negotiation [35][36].

The treaty-by-treaty position is in India bilateral investment treaty protection (ATB Legal) [37].

Decision table: hold directly, or through the Netherlands or Luxembourg?

Parent Direct Dutch holding company Luxembourg holding company
German, Swiss, Finnish, Swedish; French (until the protocol applies) Default: 10% dividends; India taxes exit (for Sweden, assume so) Exit relief on a sale by the BV to a non-Indian buyer, if substance passes India's tests Adds nothing on dividends or exit
Belgian, Spanish; Italian (10%+); Danish (25%+) 15% dividends; India taxes exit 10% dividends plus exit relief, both sensitive to the PPT 10% dividends, sensitive to the PPT; no exit relief
Private equity or fund investor — A fund vehicle that is transparent or untaxed in the Netherlands is not a treaty resident: an Indian advance ruling refused the exit exemption to Dutch funds for joint account [38]; use a taxable BV Common for funds, but only a fully taxable SOPARFI gets the treaty (Article 30); India taxes the exit

Worked example (illustrative): a Belgian parent

Hypothetical. FX: INR 107 = EUR 1 (rounded exchange rate, October 2026). The holding company's running cost of EUR 150,000 a year (INR 1.605 crore) is an assumption, not a market quote. A Belgian group's Indian subsidiary makes profit before tax of INR 100 crore a year, pays tax at 25.168% and distributes INR 74.832 crore. In year 5 the Indian company is sold for a gain of INR 300 crore.

INR crore Belgian parent directly Dutch BV Luxembourg SOPARFI
Indian dividend tax a year 74.832 × 15% = 11.225 74.832 × 10% = 7.483 7.483
Net saving a year, after running cost of 1.605 — 11.225 − 7.483 − 1.605 = 2.137 (EUR 0.20m) 2.137 (EUR 0.20m)
Indian tax on exit, foreign buyer (Indian buyer: 40.95 in every column) 300 × 13.65% = 40.95 nil, if India's anti-abuse tests are met 40.95
Five-year total, foreign buyer (tax plus running cost) 5 × 11.225 + 40.95 = 97.08 (EUR 9.07m) 5 × (7.483 + 1.605) = 45.44 (EUR 4.25m) 45.44 + 40.95 = 86.39 (EUR 8.07m)

For a German parent (10% directly), the BV saves nothing on dividends and costs 5 × 1.605 = INR 8.025 crore (EUR 0.75m) over five years, so it pays only through the exit: 40.95 − 8.025 = INR 32.9 crore (about EUR 3.08m).

Risks and common mistakes, ranked

  1. A holding company without substance: dividend withholding at up to 21.84%, and no exit relief.
  2. Selling the holding company instead of the Indian shares: the indirect-transfer rule applies and the Dutch exemption does not.
  3. Assuming Luxembourg protects the exit: India taxes the gain under that treaty.
  4. Selling to an Indian buyer through a Dutch BV: taxable where the BV holds 10% or more, unless it is a qualifying reorganisation.
  5. Missing Form 41 or the tax residency certificate: withholding at the domestic rate until fixed.
  6. Moving an existing Indian holding under a new BV or SOPARFI: the transfer is itself a sale of Indian shares, usually taxed in India under the parent's own treaty at 13.0%–13.65% of the gain; India can substitute fair market value for the price on unlisted shares, and the new holding company must withhold unless a nil-withholding certificate is obtained first [8][9]. Model this entry cost against the exit saving.

Checklist to forward internally

  • Own treaty's dividend rate and share-gains article checked
  • Commercial reason for any holding company, written without mentioning tax
  • Exit modelled three ways (parent sells, holdco sells the Indian shares, parent sells the holdco) and the likely buyer recorded
  • If the Indian shares already exist, the Indian tax on moving them modelled
  • Substance plan: resident directors, board calendar, bank mandate, office, budget
  • Tax residency certificate and Form 41 owner for each tax year
  • Upstream investors screened under Press Note 2 (2026) for land-border beneficial owners anywhere in the chain (money-laundering rules' test: above 10%, or control) [39]

How ATB Corporate can help

ATB Corporate advises companies and investors on entering, structuring and operating in India and the UAE: choosing the entry route and holding structure, tax and exchange-control planning, regulatory compliance, and setting up and running the local business. To discuss your plans, contact ATB Corporate.

FAQ

Is a Netherlands holding company still worth using for India?

A Netherlands holding company is still worth using for India mainly where the group plans to sell the Indian company to a non-Indian buyer, because India generally cannot tax the Dutch company's gain if its anti-abuse tests are met. On dividends it gets India's 10% rate, which German, French, Swiss, Swedish and Finnish parents already get directly. It needs real decision-making in the Netherlands.

Does a Luxembourg holding company reduce Indian tax on dividends or exit?

A Luxembourg holding company (SOPARFI) reduces Indian dividend tax only for parents whose own treaty rate is higher than 10%, such as Belgian and Spanish parents, and it does not reduce Indian tax on exit, because the India–Luxembourg treaty lets India tax gains on Indian shares. The treaty is also subject to a principal purpose test.

Can India tax the sale of an Indian company by a Dutch holding company?

India generally cannot tax a Dutch holding company's sale of Indian shares, except where it holds 10% or more and sells to an Indian resident outside a qualifying reorganisation, or the Indian company is property-rich and the Dutch company holds 25% or more. The principal purpose test, India's GAAR and the Tiger Global substance reasoning can also deny the exemption.

Should a Belgian, Spanish or Italian parent hold India through a Dutch holding company?

A Belgian, Spanish or Italian parent holding at least 10% can cut India's dividend withholding from 15% to 10%, and gain exit relief on a sale to a non-Indian buyer, by holding through a Dutch holding company, but only if that company has real decision-making in the Netherlands. If India denies treaty relief, it withholds 20.8%–21.84% and taxes the exit, so the structure pays only where the dividend or exit saving clearly exceeds its running and defence costs.

Does a Dutch or Luxembourg holding company have investment treaty protection in India?

No, a Dutch or Luxembourg holding company has no investment treaty protection for new investment in India: the Netherlands BIT ended on 1 December 2016 and the Belgium–Luxembourg BIT on 22 March 2017. Investments made before those dates keep cover until 1 December 2031 and 22 March 2032 respectively.

Sources

  1. Income Tax Department, India–Netherlands Convention, synthesised text with the MLI (Articles 10–13 and Protocol) — https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/netherlands-synthesised-text-1 (accessed 14 October 2026)
  2. Income Tax Department, withholding tax rates under India's tax treaties — https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/withholding-tax-rates (accessed 14 October 2026)
  3. Income Tax Department, comprehensive agreements with Germany, France, Switzerland, Sweden, Finland, Belgium, Italy, Spain and Denmark (capital gains articles) — https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/germany-comprehensive-agreements-1; https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/france-comprehensive-agreements-1; https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/swiss-confederation-comprehensive-agreements-1; https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/sweden-comprehensive-agreements-1; https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/finland-comprehensive-agreements-1; https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/belgium-comprehensive-agreements-1; https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/italy-comprehensive-agreements-1; https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/spain-comprehensive-agreements-1; https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/denmark-comprehensive-agreements-1 (accessed 14 October 2026)
  4. PwC Worldwide Tax Summaries, Sweden — income determination (last reviewed 22 September 2026) — https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/Sweden/Corporate/Income-determination
  5. PwC Worldwide Tax Summaries, India — withholding taxes — https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/india/corporate/withholding-taxes (accessed 14 October 2026)
  6. EY India, press release on the amending protocol to the India–France tax treaty (24 February 2026) — https://www.ey.com/en_in/technical/alerts-hub/2026/02/press-release-on-amending-protocol-to-india-france-tax-treaty; Orbitax, French Council of Ministers approves the protocol (23 September 2026) — https://orbitax.com/news/country/article/French-Council-of-Ministers-Ap-63122; French Senate, Projet de loi n° 951 (2025-2026) approving the amending protocol, registered 16 September 2026 — https://www.senat.fr/leg/pjl25-951.html; Étude d'impact (10 September 2026), section IV.B.1: "un décalage de l'entrée en vigueur de deux ans (§4. de l'article 15)" — https://www.senat.fr/leg/etudes-impact/pjl25-951-ei/pjl25-951-ei.pdf (both accessed 15 October 2026)
  7. KPMG US, Nestle SA most-favoured-nation ruling (October 2023) — https://kpmg.com/us/en/home/insights/2023/10/tnf-india-notification-required-benefit-under-income-tax-treaty-mfn-clause.html
  8. Income-tax Act 2025, s.197 (long-term capital gains) — https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-197-78 (accessed 14 October 2026); s.79 (fair market value as full value of consideration for unquoted shares) — https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-79-119 (accessed 15 October 2026)
  9. Income-tax Act 2025, s.393(2), Table Sl. No. 17 and Note 3(b) (tax deduction on payments to non-residents) — https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-393-5; Income Tax Department, Form 128 FAQs (certificate for lower or nil deduction of tax, s.395) — https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/documents/d/guest/form-128-faqs (both accessed 15 October 2026)
  10. BDO Global, "India: government notification is required to give effect to the MLI provisions in a tax treaty" (TFDAC Ireland II Ltd, ITAT Mumbai, 13 August 2025) (29 September 2025) — https://www.bdo.global/en-gb/insights/tax/world-wide-tax/india-government-notification-is-required-to-give-effect-to-the-mli-provisions-in-a-tax-treaty
  11. CBDT Circular 1/2025 (21 January 2025) on the principal purpose test, as summarised by EY (22 January 2025) — https://www.ey.com/content/dam/ey-unified-site/ey-com/en-in/alerts-hub/2025/01/cbdt-issues-guidance-on-application-of-principal-purpose-test.pdf
  12. Income-tax Rules 2026, Rule 128 (Chapter XI, general anti-avoidance rule, not to apply in certain cases) — https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/rule-128-2 (accessed 15 October 2026)
  13. Income-tax Act 2025, s.9(10) — https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-9-1 (accessed 14 October 2026)
  14. ITAT Delhi, Huntsman Investment (Netherlands) BV v ADIT, ITA 764/Del/2014, third member's opinion (25 March 2026) — https://itat.gov.in/public/files/upload/1774435602-Rm9sx4-1-TO.pdf; BDO India, "Buy-back qualifies as reorganization" (30 March 2026) — https://www.bdo.in/en-gb/insights/alerts-updates/direct-tax-alert-buy-back-qualifies-as-reorganization
  15. PwC India, news alert: buy-back under a High Court-approved scheme not a reorganisation (ITAT Mumbai) (21 January 2016) — https://www.pwc.in/assets/pdfs/news-alert-tax/2016/pwc-news-alert-21-january-2016-buy-back-under-a-hc-approved-scheme-not-reorganisation.pdf
  16. Income Tax Department, India–Luxembourg Agreement (2008), Articles 4, 10–13, 29 and 30 — https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/luxembourg-comprehensive-agreements-1 (accessed 15 October 2026)
  17. Orbitax, India publishes synthesised text of the MLI and the India–Luxembourg treaty (18 February 2020) — https://orbitax.com/news/country/article/India-Publishes-Synthesized-Te-40886
  18. PwC Worldwide Tax Summaries, Netherlands — income determination (last reviewed 29 May 2026) — https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/netherlands/corporate/income-determination
  19. Guichet.lu (Government of Luxembourg), "The parent-subsidiary regime" — https://guichet.public.lu/en/entreprises/fiscalite/developpement-restructuration/acquisition-societes/regime-mere-filiale.html (accessed 14 October 2026)
  20. KPMG Luxembourg, "Luxembourg participation exemption 2026" (2026) — https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmgsites/lu/pdf/2026/luxembourg-participation-exemption-2026.pdf.coredownload.inline.pdf (accessed 14 October 2026)
  21. PwC Worldwide Tax Summaries, Netherlands — withholding taxes (last reviewed 29 May 2026) — https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/netherlands/corporate/withholding-taxes
  22. Belastingdienst, advance ruling summary rul-20241217-atr-000013 (2024) — https://download.belastingdienst.nl/belastingdienst/docs/rul-20241217-atr-000013.pdf
  23. PwC Netherlands, "Dutch list of low-tax jurisdictions 2026: Barbados removed" (10 January 2026) — https://www.pwc.nl/en/insights-and-publications/tax-news/enterprises/dutch-list-of-low-tax-jurisdictions-2026-barbados-removed.html
  24. PwC Worldwide Tax Summaries, Luxembourg — other taxes (last reviewed 31 July 2026) — https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/luxembourg/corporate/other-taxes
  25. Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164 (Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive) — https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2016/1164/oj (accessed 14 October 2026)
  26. ATOZ, "EU Council confirms abandonment of the Unshell Directive proposal" (June 2025) — https://www.atoz.lu/media/eu-council-confirms-abandonment-unshell-directive-proposal; Orbitax, European Commission withdrawing proposals (27 October 2025) — https://orbitax.com/news/country/article/European-Commission-Withdrawin-60208
  27. Council Directive (EU) 2022/2523 (global minimum tax), Article 2 — https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2022/2523/oj; CMS, expert guide to Pillar Two: Netherlands (22 January 2024) — https://cms.law/en/int/expert-guides/cms-expert-guide-to-mastering-oecd-s-pillar-two/netherlands; KPMG Luxembourg, Pillar Two registration and the side-by-side package (9 January 2026) — https://kpmg.com/lu/en/home/insights/2026/01/luxembourg-launches-pillar-two-registration-filing-process-oecd-reaches-agreement-side-by-side-package.html
  28. Convention between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Federal Republic of Germany for the avoidance of double taxation (Berlin, 12 April 2012), Article 4(3), Tractatenblad 2012, No. 123 (Dutch text) — https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/trb-2012-123.pdf (accessed 15 October 2026)
  29. EY India, Supreme Court rules on tax treaty eligibility and taxation of an indirect transfer of shares (Tiger Global) (19 January 2026) — https://www.ey.com/content/dam/ey-unified-site/ey-com/en-in/alerts-hub/2026/01/supreme-court-of-india-rules-on-tax-treaty-eligibility-and-taxation-of-an-indirect-transfer-of-shares.pdf
  30. Income-tax Act 2025, s.6(10) (residence of a company; place of effective management) — https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-6-1 (accessed 15 October 2026)
  31. CMS, "Expert guide on substance issues across Europe: Netherlands" (19 June 2023) — https://cms.law/en/int/expert-guides/cms-expert-guide-on-substance-issues-across-europe/netherlands (accessed 15 October 2026)
  32. India–Netherlands BIT (1995), Article 16(1), WTI EDIT database — https://edit.wti.org/document/show/3abf6f22-022f-4240-b384-cba03d083744 (accessed 14 October 2026)
  33. BLEU (Belgium–Luxembourg Economic Union)–India BIT (1997), Article 16(2), WTI EDIT database — https://edit.wti.org/document/show/30505d3e-ac7b-4dae-9309-aed03a56cd20 (accessed 14 October 2026)
  34. UNCTAD Investment Policy Hub, Luxembourg: international investment agreements (BLEU–India BIT terminated 22 March 2017) — https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/international-investment-agreements/countries/122/luxembourg (accessed 14 October 2026)
  35. European Parliament, Legislative Train: EU–India FTA, investment protection and GI agreements — https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-a-global-europe-leveraging-our-power-and-partnerships/file-eu-india-fta-bit-and-gi-agreement; European Commission, EU–India agreements — https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/eu-trade-relationships-country-and-region/countries-and-regions/india/eu-india-agreements_en (both accessed 14 October 2026)
  36. OrissaPost / PTI, "India–EU investment protection pact, GI agreements work in progress: Goyal" (17 July 2026) — https://www.orissapost.com/india-eu-investment-protection-pact-gi-agreements-work-in-progress-goyal/
  37. ATB Legal, India bilateral investment treaty protection: how to secure your investment before a dispute (October 2026) — https://atblegal.com/blog/foreign-investment-in-india/india-bilateral-investment-treaty/
  38. Bloomberg Tax, "Tax transparent entity denied benefits under India–Netherlands tax treaty" (ABC, In Re, AAR Nos. 1358–1362 of 2012, [2021] 125 Taxmann 293) (28 May 2021; subscription) — https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report-international/tax-transparent-entity-denied-benefits-under-india-netherlands-tax-treaty (accessed 15 October 2026)
  39. DPIIT, Press Note 2 (2026 Series), review of FDI policy on investments from countries sharing land borders with India (15 March 2026) — https://www.dpiit.gov.in/static/uploads/2026/03/b9da5830b052c2f2d788593e97d07c63.pdf (accessed 15 October 2026)

Disclaimer: This article is general information, not legal or tax advice. It reflects our understanding of Indian, Dutch, Luxembourg and EU law and treaty positions at 15 October 2026. Verify against current law and take advice on your specific facts before acting.

Keep Reading

More practical commentary from the ATB Knowledge Series.

All insights
From Reading to Advice

How does this apply to your structure?

This article is general commentary — your situation is specific. When the position needs a clear answer for your business, talk to our team.

Get in touch