Another blow for climate fanatics: IMF confirms economic stagnation due to climate and nitrogen policies

A new report by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) warns the Netherlands of slowing economic growth, significant uncertainty regarding economic prospects and structural problems that are putting pressure on investment and competitiveness.

According to the IMF, the Netherlands is grappling with serious bottlenecks in areas including grid congestion, nitrogen restrictions, housing shortages and high labour costs. At the same time, the Fund warns of rising climate-related expenditure and an increasingly difficult investment climate.

Forum for Democracy sees this as confirmation of what the party has been arguing for years: the Netherlands is destroying itself economically with ideological policies, sky-high costs and stifling regulation.

FVD MP Milan Schenk therefore tabled parliamentary questions to the Ministers of Finance, Economic Affairs and Climate Policy, and Social Affairs and Employment the day after he was sworn in as a new Member of Parliament. In his questions, he addresses, among other things, stagnating economic growth, the consequences of grid congestion and nitrogen policy for investment and industry, the role of immigration in the housing shortage, the rising tax burden on labour, and the consequences of climate policy for Dutch competitiveness.

The IMF report confirms that the Netherlands is becoming increasingly bogged down by misguided political choices regarding climate, nitrogen, immigration and taxation. Whilst economies outside Europe are investing in growth, industry and affordable energy, the Netherlands and the European Union are increasingly opting for additional regulations, higher burdens and restrictions that hamper economic development. As far as Schenk is concerned, this must change as soon as possible, in the interests of Dutch citizens, entrepreneurs and businesses.

Written questions from Member Schenk (FVD) to the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy and the Minister of Social Affairs and Employment regarding the stagnation of the Dutch economy according to the IMF

1. Are you familiar with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) report on the Dutch economy dated 13 May 2026?
2. How does the government assess the IMF’s conclusion that economic growth in the Netherlands is stagnating at around 1 per cent and that there is considerable uncertainty regarding the economic outlook?
3. Does the government acknowledge that the Netherlands is increasingly facing structural problems which are putting pressure on investment, economic growth and competitiveness?
4. If the answer to question 3 is no, why not?
5. How does the government assess the IMF’s observation that grid congestion, a direct consequence of the energy transition, constitutes a ‘binding constraint’ on investment and economic development in the Netherlands?
6. What is the estimated annual economic damage caused by grid congestion, resulting in postponed connections and delayed investments?
7. Does the answer to question 6 give the government cause to scale back its climate ambitions and suspend the energy transition for the time being?
8. If the answer to question 7 is no, why not?
9. How does the government assess the IMF’s observation that nitrogen-related restrictions constitute a major obstacle to investment and economic development in the Netherlands?
10. Does the government acknowledge that the current nitrogen policy is leading to serious delays in housing construction, infrastructure projects, industrial expansion and economic development?
11. If the answer to question 10 is no, why not?
12. If the answer to question 10 is in the affirmative, what concrete steps will the government take to put a stop to these harmful developments?
13. How does the government assess the IMF’s conclusion that the housing shortage requires ambitious reforms?
14. What role does the government believe population growth resulting from immigration plays in the ongoing pressure on the housing market, infrastructure and amenities?
15. Can the Government set out how many additional homes are needed, according to current forecasts, as a result of the expected population growth due to immigration now and over the next ten years?
16. Does the Government share the submitter’s analysis that immigration, a major cause of the housing shortage, is holding back the Dutch economy?
17. If the answer to question 16 is in the negative, why not?
18. Does the Government share the IMF’s analysis that the current coalition plans increase the tax burden on labour, reduce labour participation and raise wage costs?
19. If the answer to question 18 is no, why not?
20. If the answer to question 18 is yes, what concrete steps will the Government take to change this?
21. Why has the government chosen to impose heavier taxes on labour (including through the ‘freedom contribution’) when the IMF specifically warns that higher labour costs lead to fewer hours worked and lower labour participation?
22. How does this, in the government’s view, relate to the principle that work must pay?
23. Are you aware of the recent statement by Professor of Labour and Macroeconomics Pieter Gautier that approximately a quarter of gross domestic product goes towards benefits and that this makes the tax system unnecessarily complex?
24. If the answer to question 23 is in the affirmative, how does the government assess this reality?
25. Does the government agree with the analysis that the current tax and benefits system leads to perverse incentives, high administrative costs and reduced transparency for Dutch citizens and businesses?
26. What concrete steps will the government take to simplify the tax and benefits system fundamentally?
27. How high does the government expect total climate-related expenditure to be by 2030 and 2050, particularly given that the IMF describes rising climate-related expenditure as a risk to the sustainability of public finances?
28. How does the government assess the tension between, on the one hand, ever-increasing climate-related costs and, on the other hand, maintaining competitiveness, industry and economic growth?
29. Does the government acknowledge that high energy prices and climate-related costs are contributing to a deterioration in the Dutch business and investment climate?
30. If the answer to question 29 is no, why not?
31. If the answer to question 29 is yes, what specific measures will the government take to improve the Dutch business and investment climate?
32. How does the Government assess signals from industry that companies and investments are leaving the Netherlands due to high energy costs, regulatory burdens, uncertain policy and increasing climate obligations?
33. Does the Government believe that current economic policy improves the Netherlands’ competitive position relative to countries such as the United States and China?
34. If the answer to question 33 is in the negative, what specific measures will the government take to improve the Netherlands’ competitive position?
35. What specific measures will the government take to counteract further stagnation of the Dutch economy, declining investment and loss of competitiveness?
36. Does the Government share the questioner’s conclusion that the IMF’s findings show that Dutch policy on climate (high costs and investment), nitrogen (stagnation in housing and industrial expansion), immigration (cause of the housing shortage) and taxation (no incentive to work) contributes significantly to the stagnation of the economy?
37. If the answer to question 36 is in the negative, why not?
38. If the answer to question 36 is in the affirmative, what specific measures will the government take regarding policy on climate, nitrogen, immigration and taxation to improve the Netherlands’ position?
39. In general terms, how does the government deal with reports, recommendations and findings from the IMF?
40. Could you please answer these questions as soon as possible and separately from one another?