Belgium’s Flexi-Job System ‘Spiraling Out of Control’
Belgian Budget Minister Vincent Van Peteghem (CD&V) has issued a stark warning that the country’s flexi-job system is “spiraling out of control” and undermining the financial sustainability of the welfare state. In an interview with De Standaard, Van Peteghem called for urgent reforms to address what he described as a system drifting far from its original purpose.
A System Under Strain
Introduced in 2015 and initially limited to the hospitality sector, flexi-jobs allow workers who already hold at least an 80% full-time equivalent position — or are pensioners — to earn additional income with significantly reduced tax and social security burdens. Gross pay equals net pay for employees, while employers pay a 28% social security contribution.
The system has expanded dramatically. According to VRT NWS reporting on official RSZ statistics, more than 261,000 people worked as flexi-jobbers in 2025 — a 14% increase year-on-year — and nearly 53,000 companies used the system, up 12% from 2024. As of July 1, 2026, the federal government expanded flexi-jobs to nearly all sectors with an opt-out mechanism, raising the annual tax-free limit from €12,000 to €18,000.
Van Peteghem’s Warning
“It was never the intention to make flexi-jobs the cheapest form of labor and thereby put pressure on the entire labor market,” Van Peteghem told De Standaard. “In that respect, the growing number of flexi-jobs is becoming the new long-term sick leave. It is derailing. In this way, our welfare state will not remain affordable.”
The minister argued that the system has created a perverse incentive, making it fiscally more advantageous to combine a four-fifths job with a flexi-job than to work full-time. He proposed removing “injustices and contradictions” from the system.
Van Peteghem also linked the flexi-job debate to Belgium’s broader budget crisis, citing an IMF warning that if the country continues on its current path, it could end up with a worse sovereign debt situation than Greece.
Political Pushback
The minister’s remarks drew immediate pushback from coalition partner N-VA. Parliamentary group leader Axel Ronse countered that 83% of flexi-jobbers already work full-time, arguing that flexi-jobs simply represent overtime performed for a different employer.
“Flexi-jobs therefore do not come at the expense of permanent jobs, quite the contrary,” Ronse said, as reported by Het Laatste Nieuws. He noted that employers pay a higher contribution rate (28%) on flexi-jobbers than on regular employees (25%), and argued the system fills critical labor market shortages.
Expert Perspectives
Labour economist Ive Marx of the University of Antwerp warned that flexi-jobs may be a net negative for the budget. “The government is looking for money, but at the same time it is massively creating work from which the state earns nothing,” he told VRT NWS. Marx cautioned that the system risks displacing regular workers who need full-time employment.
However, Jasper Hubeau, Director of the RSZ Financial and Statistical Service, noted that the government both wins and loses from the system. While employees pay no taxes or social contributions, employers pay higher contributions, and the system brings undeclared work into the formal economy.
Joran Ceulebroeck of UNIZO, the self-employed organization, defended the system: “You can hardly speak of a loss for the state treasury when it concerns extra work that is officially registered and on which contributions are paid.”
Broader Budget Context
The flexi-job debate unfolds against the backdrop of a severe Belgian budget crisis. Prime Minister Bart De Wever (N-VA) warned on July 9 that the “Titanic has already hit the iceberg,” as the core cabinet agreed on a €10 billion savings target by 2029. A budget conclave is planned for September, with a deadline in October.
What’s Next
Van Peteghem has called for removing structural contradictions from the flexi-job system, but has not yet detailed specific legislative proposals. With N-VA defending the system and MR opposing new taxes, it remains unclear whether the Arizona coalition can agree on reforms. The September budget conclave will be a critical test of whether the government can reconcile labor market flexibility with fiscal sustainability.