Regional UWV fine figures sharpen questions over unequal treatment

Dutch social affairs minister Hans Vijlbrief has called for a thorough investigation after AD and EenVandaag reported that people with bicultural surnames receive fines more often, and in higher amounts, in fraud investigations by benefits agency UWV. The outlets examined an internal study and spoke to employees, according to news agency ANP. [1]

Vijlbrief called racism and discrimination unacceptable, said he took the reports extremely seriously and expected UWV to take appropriate measures. UWV chief Abdeluheb Choho condemned discriminatory remarks made among some employees and apologised to people who felt discriminated against or had been subjected to racist treatment. [1]

UWV disputes what can be concluded from the analysis of fines. It says the data and research method are not sufficiently suitable to support conclusions at this stage. Separately, AD reported that a reference to ‘country of origin’ had remained visible in a work instruction. UWV says the criterion was officially removed in 2020 but remained visible, crossed out, because of an administrative oversight. [1]

UWV is awaiting the results of a broader investigation, expected later in 2026. It has not yet accepted the reported differences in fines as a conclusion of the internal analysis. [1]

Update

EenVandaag says researchers examined 1,682 UWV decisions across four regions. In Randstad Noord, people with non-Dutch surnames made up 44% of those investigated by enforcement staff but received 74% of the fines. In Zuid, 36% of investigated files involved a non-Dutch surname; people in those files received 71% of the fines and accounted for 98% of the total amount imposed in that region. EenVandaag reported smaller disparities in the other two regions. [3]

The figures compare cases already investigated, not all benefit recipients, and do not show why the fines differed. EenVandaag says it is not known exactly which files were compared. UWV says the analysis cannot support a conclusion about structural unequal treatment. Its board chair has separately acknowledged that discrimination and racism occur within the organisation; that acknowledgement does not establish the cause of the reported fine disparities.