I. The Dutch Integration Landscape: Where Things Stand Today

The Dutch integration regime has undergone significant changes over the past decade. The government—through agencies such as IND and DUO—has repeatedly updated the civic integration process to balance labor market needs, educational objectives, and broader societal concerns.

As of February 2026, the verified legal standards are:

• Language level for naturalization: A2
• Civic integration requirements: As defined under the Wet Inburgering 2021
• Residency requirement: 5 years continuous lawful stay
• Exam framework: Administered through DUO, entirely A2-aligned

No amendments have been passed in the Dutch Parliament (Eerste Kamer + Tweede Kamer) that would alter these components.

However, political debate does not occur in a vacuum. To understand why B1 is repeatedly resurfacing, one must analyze the broader political context.

II. Why the B1 Debate Keeps Returning: The Political Context

Raising the language level for naturalization is not a new idea in the Netherlands. Over the past 15 years, multiple coalitions have floated the possibility of moving to B1. Some political parties argue that higher proficiency supports better labor participation, smoother integration, and more independence in bureaucracy-heavy environments.

But even within Dutch political circles, the discussion is far from unanimous.

1. Parties supporting the idea of B1 (in principle):

Several center-right and conservative parties have historically expressed support for making the civic integration process “more demanding,” arguing that:

• Higher language proficiency improves access to employment
• Naturalization should reflect “deep integration” into society
• The Netherlands should align with neighbors like Germany

However, support often depends on coalition dynamics, budget constraints, and feasibility concerns.

2. Parties cautious or critical of the move:

Progressive and social-liberal parties have, in various periods, raised concerns about:

• Unrealistic expectations for vulnerable migrant groups
• Increased exam difficulty without better educational support
• Potential inequality for refugees and low-literate newcomers
• The administrative burden on local municipalities

Their arguments point to systemic risks: failing exams delays naturalization, affects security of residence, and creates long-term integration barriers rather than solving them.

3. The current coalition situation

The government in 2026 remains in debate mode, but no binding agreement has been published, and no bill has been filed with Parliament. The status remains:

• Discussion: active
• Political consensus: not achieved
• Legal process: not initiated

This distinction is critical. Political interest does not equal legislation.

III. A2 vs. B1: What Would Actually Change?

Language exams in the Netherlands follow the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR). The difference between A2 and B1 is significant—both linguistically and socioeconomically.

From a linguistic perspective, moving from A2 to B1 requires:

• A doubling of vocabulary range
• More complex grammar comprehension
• Cultural-context integration
• Consistent, structured study habits

Integration schools across the Netherlands estimate that B1 study time is 2–3 times greater than A2 preparation.

IV. Administrative Reality: What DUO and IND Actually Say

Both governmental bodies remain consistent in their messaging.

IND Position

The IND—the national authority overseeing residency and citizenship procedures—states:

• The A2 requirement remains valid.
• Any change requires a formal legislative process.
• Until such a law is passed, applications are evaluated under current rules.

There have been no official bulletins, no Staatscourant entries, and no procedural updates indicating a shift.

DUO Position

DUO, which manages the civic integration exams, confirms:

• All exam modules remain designed around A2-level objectives.
• No official directive has been issued to redesign the exam structure.
• Language schools must continue to use A2-based curricula unless instructed otherwise.

Combined, these two agencies provide the clearest verification: nothing has changed.

V. Residency Requirement: Why the 5-Year Rule Remains Intact

Expats frequently express concern about potential increases to the residency requirement—from 5 to 7, or even 10 years. This idea occasionally appears in political manifestos but has not moved beyond the discussion stage.

Verified reality:

• The 5-year rule is unchanged.
• The Dutch government has published no active proposal to lengthen the naturalization period.
• Municipalities continue to process applications under existing guidelines.

The 5-year requirement has remained stable for decades because:

• It aligns with EU norms
• It supports integration goals
• It balances economic needs with social policy

For now, it remains a foundation of Dutch naturalization law.

VI. How a Legal Change Would Happen: Understanding the Process

To prevent misinformation, it is essential to outline how Dutch law actually changes.

A shift to B1 cannot occur overnight. The process requires:

1. Draft legislation
2. Cabinet approval
3. Submission to Tweede Kamer (Lower House)
4. Debate and amendments
5. Vote in the Lower House
6. Review by Eerste Kamer (Senate)
7. Publication in Staatscourant
8. Transition period guidelines by IND & DUO

As of February 2026, Step 1 has not even begun.

Thus, any online claims offering dates, deadlines, or “confirmed implementation timelines” are simply not accurate.

VII. Why the Debate Matters Even Without Legislation

Even though no law exists yet, the ongoing debate signals broader trends in Dutch migration policy:

1. A push for higher integration standards

The Netherlands, like many Western European countries, is reviewing how integration outcomes are measured. Language proficiency has become central to this conversation.

2. Economic considerations

Dutch employers increasingly request higher linguistic competence—even for non-Dutch-speaking workplaces. Labor shortages continue across key sectors.

3. Pressure from municipalities

Local governments shoulder much of the integration burden. Some municipalities argue that a B1 requirement would require:

• More state funding
• Better access to language courses
• Longer integration timelines

Without structural support, a sudden shift could strain municipal systems.

VIII. Academic Research: Does Higher Language Proficiency Improve Integration?

Academic studies from Dutch universities and research institutes generally agree that:

• B1-level proficiency correlates with better labor outcomes
• Higher proficiency improves social mobility
• But mandatory higher standards without support can increase inequality

A forced B1 requirement without additional subsidies, teacher availability, or accessible integration pathways may backfire.

IX. What Expats Often Misinterpret: Clearing Up Common Myths

Due to speculation in community forums, social media, and expat groups, several misconceptions circulate repeatedly. Below are the verified clarifications.

• MYTH 1: “The government already approved B1.”
  False. No law exists, no approval has occurred.
• MYTH 2: “The transition will start in 2026.”
  False. No official timeline exists.
• MYTH 3: “People in the process must retake exams.”
  False. Until a law changes, all processes continue under A2.
• MYTH 4: “Residency will become 10 years.”
  False. No such proposal is active.
• MYTH 5: “Newspapers said it is definite.”
  False. Media commentary often reflects political discussion, not formal law.

X. The Dutch Perspective: Why “Certainty” Isn’t Given Easily

Dutch legislative culture tends to avoid premature announcements. The government and ministries disclose changes only after legal certainty is ensured. This transparency reduces confusion but can create perceived ambiguity during debate periods.

Thus, the lack of official communication on B1 is itself a reliable indicator: there is no confirmed decision.

XI. What Expats Should Realistically Do in 2026

Based on verified policies:

1. Continue studying for A2
   Since A2 is the legal requirement, preparing for it remains a valid investment.
2. Monitor official government channels
   The only fully reliable sources are: IND, DUO, Rijksoverheid, Municipal immigration desks.
3. Be cautious with online rumors
   Many English-language expat forums spread outdated or inaccurate interpretations.
4. Keep documents ready for naturalization
   Regardless of language level, the administrative process is lengthy.
5. Consider B1 as a personal benefit
   Even if not required yet, B1 proficiency increases: employability, educational prospects, social integration.

XII. Looking Ahead: What Could Happen in the Next Two Years?

Although no one can predict exact outcomes, political analysts note:

• A B1 requirement is possible in the long term, but not imminent.
• Implementation—if approved—would likely involve a transition period of 1.5 to 3 years.
• The government would need to invest significantly in language education infrastructure.
• Municipalities would require updated guidance and financial support.

Thus, while the debate is active, rapid change is highly unlikely.

Conclusion: The Facts in 2026

As of February 2026:

• Dutch citizenship language requirement remains A2.
• No law, proposal, or timeline exists for a switch to B1.
• The 5-year residency rule remains unchanged.
• IND and DUO continue operating entirely under A2 guidelines.
• Any future change must pass through the full legislative process.

Expats can safely prepare for A2 without risk of sudden rule changes.

The political conversation around integration will continue, but for now, expats should rely on the only stable element in the Dutch system: the rules as they are written today.

🇳🇱 Dutch Learning Corner: Integration & Naturalization