Belgium’s Constitutional Court delivered a major setback to the federal coalition on 26 February 2026 when it suspended several pillars of the July-and-August 2025 asylum package that Prime-Minister Bart De Wever had touted as “the strictest migration policy in Belgian history.” In two separate interim rulings, the Court found that tightened family-reunification rules and new limits on reception for certain asylum seekers could breach EU directives and fundamental-rights provisions. Most attention centred on a controversial two-year waiting period and sharply higher income thresholds for beneficiaries of subsidiary protection who wish to bring spouses or children to Belgium. The judges noted “serious indications” that the measures are disproportionate and therefore referred five preliminary questions to the Court of Justice of the EU; the Belgian rules are frozen until Luxembourg issues guidance, a process that could take many months. The suspension has immediate, practical consequences for global-mobility teams.
![Belgian Constitutional Court freezes key parts of government’s ‘strictest migration policy’]()
At this juncture, many corporate mobility specialists turn to VisaHQ for up-to-date Belgian entry guidance and document processing. The platform’s country hub (https://www.visahq.com/belgium/) centralises the latest forms, fee tables and appointment slots, and its concierge team can rapidly audit family-reunification files against the reinstated rules—saving HR departments valuable time while the legal landscape remains fluid.
Human-resources managers who were advising transferees to delay dependant applications must now revert to the pre-August-2025 framework—no extra waiting period applies and the lower, pre-2025 salary benchmark once again governs proof-of-means. Immigration counsel warn, however, that municipal offices may require a short re-tooling period while new instructions filter down. Companies should build a 2- to 3-week buffer into start dates for impacted family members and prepare to re-submit documents that were returned under the stricter rules. Beyond family reunification, the Court also froze provisions limiting access to reception centres for applicants who already hold protection elsewhere in the EU and scrapping cash allowances in exceptional circumstances. NGOs hailed the verdict as a “crystal-clear message” that basic rights cannot be sacrificed for political optics, while Migration Minister Anneleen Van Bossuyt insisted the judgment affects “only a very small minority” of cases and predicted that the EU’s forthcoming Migration Pact would ultimately validate the government’s approach. For multinational employers the ruling injects welcome clarity: the legal environment reverts—for now—to the well-known, pre-2025 playbook. Nevertheless, policy flux remains likely through 2026-27 as Belgium waits for guidance from the CJEU and for the new EU Pact to take effect. Global mobility leaders should therefore keep internal stakeholders abreast of possible further reversals and ensure that assignment cost projections include contingency for both legal fees and temporary accommodation should reception-capacity issues resurface.
At this juncture, many corporate mobility specialists turn to VisaHQ for up-to-date Belgian entry guidance and document processing. The platform’s country hub (https://www.visahq.com/belgium/) centralises the latest forms, fee tables and appointment slots, and its concierge team can rapidly audit family-reunification files against the reinstated rules—saving HR departments valuable time while the legal landscape remains fluid.
Human-resources managers who were advising transferees to delay dependant applications must now revert to the pre-August-2025 framework—no extra waiting period applies and the lower, pre-2025 salary benchmark once again governs proof-of-means. Immigration counsel warn, however, that municipal offices may require a short re-tooling period while new instructions filter down. Companies should build a 2- to 3-week buffer into start dates for impacted family members and prepare to re-submit documents that were returned under the stricter rules. Beyond family reunification, the Court also froze provisions limiting access to reception centres for applicants who already hold protection elsewhere in the EU and scrapping cash allowances in exceptional circumstances. NGOs hailed the verdict as a “crystal-clear message” that basic rights cannot be sacrificed for political optics, while Migration Minister Anneleen Van Bossuyt insisted the judgment affects “only a very small minority” of cases and predicted that the EU’s forthcoming Migration Pact would ultimately validate the government’s approach. For multinational employers the ruling injects welcome clarity: the legal environment reverts—for now—to the well-known, pre-2025 playbook. Nevertheless, policy flux remains likely through 2026-27 as Belgium waits for guidance from the CJEU and for the new EU Pact to take effect. Global mobility leaders should therefore keep internal stakeholders abreast of possible further reversals and ensure that assignment cost projections include contingency for both legal fees and temporary accommodation should reception-capacity issues resurface.
