Belgium Recovers €19M in Temp Agency Training Fraud

The Flemish Social Inspection has recovered or blocked approximately 19 million euros in fraudulent training leave subsidies from two large temporary employment agencies, Flemish Minister of Work Zuhal Demir (N-VA) announced on September 3. The case represents one of the largest fraud scandals in Belgium’s employment sector, according to VRT NWS.

The Fraud Scheme

The fraud involved falsified attendance lists, with more training hours registered than were actually delivered. In some cases, training programs claimed for subsidies did not exist at all, HLN reported. Minister Demir described it as years-long fraud and confirmed that a judicial investigation is ongoing. The two companies involved have not been publicly named.

“Flemish tax money is not a business model. Whoever flouts the rules is out,” Demir said in a statement. “Whoever defrauds training leave steals from workers who do want to retrain and from the Fleming who pays taxes for it.”

How Training Leave Works

Flemish training leave (Vlaams Opleidingsverlof) allows private-sector employees to take up to 125 hours of recognized training per year during working hours without losing their salary. Employers receive government compensation—previously 15 euros per hour—for the hours employees spend in training. Because the subsidy goes directly to the employer, workers often do not notice the fraud until they attempt to use their training credit and find it exhausted.

A Pattern of Abuse in the Temp Sector

This is not the first time temp agencies have been implicated in training leave fraud. In November 2025, VRT NWS reported that Accent Jobs and Itzu had massively embezzled subsidies for training that either did not exist or did not qualify for the scheme. Minister Demir suspended subsidies for the entire temp sector at that time and placed the two companies under curatorship.

Data obtained by Flemish parliament member Nawal Maghroud (Vooruit) shows the scale of the problem: of 27 fraud investigations opened in 2025, 22 targeted temp agencies—and irregularities or fraud were confirmed in all 22 cases. The same HLN report from July also revealed that in 2024 alone, more than 9 million euros in unjustified subsidies were recovered.

“That was already established earlier, but temp agencies kept denying it,” Maghroud said. “These figures prove it clearly: the practice of fraud with training leave subsidies is still in the temp sector.”

Three additional investigations into other temp agencies are expected to be completed by the end of 2026, TVL reported.

Expert Analysis: Systemic Vulnerabilities

Kristof Salomez, professor of social law at VUB, told VRT NWS that the fraud has been facilitated by policy decisions allowing in-company training and workplace learning to qualify for subsidies. “With this type of fraud, it is facilitated bit by bit because the decision was made that in-company training and workplace learning also qualify for Flemish training leave,” Salomez said.

Salomez cautioned against abolishing the system entirely, noting that society benefits when workers maintain strong positions in the labor market. However, he questioned whether in-company training should be subsidized given its fraud sensitivity. “One could place a social inspector in every company to see if training leave is applied correctly, but that is not workable,” he said. “The question is more whether in-company training is really appropriate. It is in any case very fraud-sensitive. One can allow it, but subsidizing it—that I find something else.”

New Rules Take Effect

Effective September 1, 2026, the Flemish government implemented a major reform of the training leave system designed to curb abuse. According to the official government guidance, fraudsters can now be excluded from the system for up to two years—or four years for repeat offenses—and fines can reach 12,000 euros.

The scope of qualifying training has been significantly narrowed. Only labor-market-oriented training now qualifies, specifically training for bottleneck professions, STEM professions, and programs leading to a first secondary education diploma. General training on topics like leadership and teamwork has been removed from the system. In-company training now requires a favorable preliminary opinion, and each education can only be followed once.

For compliant employers, the system has become more generous: the flat-rate compensation increases from 14.91 to 24.50 euros per hour. The Flemish Social Inspection has also been strengthened with 21 additional inspectors.

“Whoever tries to make fraud a business model must know that the bill will ultimately come to them,” Demir said. “We have increased controls and tightened sanctions. That is the only right message to the vast majority of employers and training providers who do work correctly.”

Industry Response

Federgon, the federation of HR service providers, condemned any form of improper use of government resources when the first scandal broke in November 2025. “The improper use of funds from the Flemish Training Leave undermines trust in an important instrument of Flemish learning policy and creates unfair competition against training providers who work correctly,” the federation stated. However, Federgon also urged that the entire temp sector not be excluded from subsidies, arguing that the importance of training temp workers must not be compromised by the improper use of some.

What’s Next

With a judicial investigation ongoing and three more probes into temp agencies expected to conclude by year’s end, the full scope of training leave fraud in Belgium’s temp sector may not yet be known. The September reforms represent a significant tightening of the system, but experts like Salomez suggest that ongoing vigilance will be required—particularly around in-company training, which remains a fraud-sensitive area even under the new rules.

The case also raises broader questions about how governments can balance the need for workforce development programs with robust oversight. As Demir put it: “Flemish tax money is not a business model.” The question now is whether the new rules will be sufficient to ensure it never becomes one again.