1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |New Exemptions For Foreign Workers

New Exemptions For Foreign Workers

Client Alert | 1 min read | 11.16.07

Since 8 October 2007, new categories of foreign workers are exempt from obtaining a category B work permit in order to be employed in Belgium. In addition, the procedure for obtaining such work permit has been simplified for other categories of foreign workers.

A foreign worker can only be employed in Belgium if he holds a work permit, except if he is exempt from this obligation. There are three different types of work permits.

The most common work permit is the so-called category B work permit, which allows the foreign worker concerned to work for a specific employer for a definite period of time (with a maximum of 12 months). There are, however, a number of exemptions, which allow for a foreign worker to be employed without first obtaining a work permit. Since 8 October 2007, this list of exemptions from the obligation to obtain a category B work permit is extended.

In practice, the most important new exemption is the one that applies to foreign workers employed as executives by Belgian headquarters, provided that their annual salary exceeds 56,187 € (in 2007). Since 8 October 2007, foreign workers who travel to Belgium in order to attend congresses, to receive training or to carry out certain services (assembling and installation of goods, urgent maintenance or reparation works) are also entitled to invoke an exemption. Most exemptions are, however, limited in time and are subject to certain conditions.

For some other categories of foreign workers, no exemptions have been introduced, but the procedure for obtaining the category B work permit was simplified.

However, please note that the duty to notify the foreign workers with the National Office for Social Security (the so-called LIMOSA regulation) remains in effect, with some exceptions. Indeed, unfortunately, the exemptions from the obligation to obtain a work permit were not harmonized with the exemptions under the LIMOSA regulation.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25

Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality

On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument....

View All Insights