BRUSSELS — Frustrated EU countries are ramping up pressure on Belgium to release €140 billion of frozen Russian reserves held in Brussels by accusing Bart De Wever’s government of failing to fully disclose what it does with the tax income from those immobilized assets.

The European Commission wants the 27 EU countries to agree to send the Russian reserves as a reparations loan to Kyiv at a crunch European Council meeting on Dec. 18, in a drive to bail out the Ukrainian economy.

But Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever is resisting — and ratcheted up his opposition on Thursday evening — arguing Belgium will be on the hook if Moscow claws back the billions.

Five diplomats from various European countries, however, complained that Belgium appears to have a secondary agenda in holding onto Russia’s money thanks to the tax generated. They noted Belgium was breaking an international commitment — made last year — to disclose what it was doing with tax from the frozen reserves, which is supposed to go to Ukraine.

The diplomats said the money was still being folded into the Belgian national budget, making it impossible to determine whether Belgium is fully living up to its commitments to Kyiv. The diplomats spoke on condition that they — and the countries they represent — remain anonymous. Belgium strenuously denies it is doing anything wrong.

If Belgium continues to push back on sending the frozen funds to Kyiv, the diplomats said, EU member countries will increasingly use meetings in the run-up to the European Council summit to question whether Belgium is profiting from the tax income or delaying payments to Ukraine. They also query whether Belgium is using regular tax revenue to support Ukraine — as other European countries are — or is simply relying on tax from the Russian reserves.

“In light of this ongoing foot-dragging behavior, one wonders whether it has actually been understood that it’s Europe’s security which is at stake here,” a senior EU diplomat told POLITICO. 

“And in view of the data, there are doubts as to whether Belgium is delivering on its promise to sent its windfall tax gains to Ukraine.”

The money is hard to track, but diplomats questioning the numbers use sources such as the Kiel Institute, which pegs Belgium’s total commitment to Ukraine at €3.44 billion between the start of the war and Aug. 31, 2025. To put that in context, the tax from the Russian assets totaled €1.7 billion in 2024 alone.

The Belgian government rejected the criticism of the diplomats, saying that all the tax earned from the Russian reserves held in the Euroclear bank in Brussels was “earmarked” to Kyiv. It did not directly answer a question on whether all of it had already been paid.

“The Belgian government has committed to allocating all corporate tax revenue from the interest income on Russia’s immobilized assets at Euroclear to support Ukraine,” said a Belgian official. “For 2025, this revenue is currently estimated at around €1 billion.”

The Belgian government also insisted that the money paid to Ukraine came from Belgian federal government sources beyond the tax on assets.

“In addition to the full use of the corporate tax on the windfall profits, which is fully used for military support to Ukraine, the Belgian federal government has provided since 2022 roughly just under 1 billion euros in military and other support to Ukraine,” the Belgian official wrote in a statement.

Since the Russian assets are held by the Brussels-based depository Euroclear, the Belgian government levies a 25 percent corporate tax on profits generated from the interest on the holdings.

“[This] funding is entirely earmarked for Ukraine and goes toward the provision of military-related support (military hardware, training, etc.) as well as limited civilian items such as ambulances,” the Belgian official continued.

Part of the frustration among Belgium’s EU allies is that this lack of transparency was meant to be resolved last year.

In 2024, several Western countries accused the Belgian government of using part of the tax revenues from assets to cover ordinary budgetary needs. In response to that criticism, the previous Belgian government pledged to transfer the tax revenues to an EU and G7 financial instrument for Ukraine.

But Belgium never delivered on that promise. When asked why it was not using the special instrument to be transparent about the funds, the Belgian government did not reply.

A second senior EU diplomat critical of Belgium had an explanation.

“The tax revenue was already part of their domestic budget, and they didn’t want to give it up,” the envoy said.