All news
Regulation September 18, 2026 6 min

Four weeks, not a day more: how long applicant data may be kept in the Netherlands

The period covers everything — CV, letter, interview notes, assessment and emails — and the talent pool needs consent that was asked for and given, not a pre-ticked box

TL;DR

Data on rejected applicants is deleted within four weeks of the end of the procedure. With active consent this may extend to one year. The period covers the whole file: CV, cover letter, interview notes, assessment results and the email exchange. For those who are hired a different regime begins, and there the copy of the identity document has its own period of five years from the end of the calendar year in which employment ended.

Four weeks, and everything that falls under it

The Dutch supervisory authority works on a maximum of four weeks after the application procedure closes. It is the shortest period any European authority applies on this point, and it is not optional: when a rejected candidate complains, it is the first thing checked, because it can be established without any investigation at all.

What usually goes wrong is not the period but its scope. It covers all the data from the procedure: the CV, the covering letter, the interview notes, the outcome of an assessment and the correspondence with the candidate. An organisation that removes the CV from the system and leaves the interview notes in a shared folder has not complied — and those notes are often the most sensitive documents in the whole file.

The talent pool is a second processing operation

Keeping a candidate for future vacancies is possible for up to one year, but only where the candidate has given active consent. Active means asked and answered. A pre-ticked box at the foot of the application form is not consent, and a candidate who never responded to the request is not in the talent pool but in a database without a basis.

The pool is also a different processing operation from the recruitment itself: different purpose, different basis, different period. Putting it in the same line of the record makes the four weeks disappear without anyone having decided to make them disappear.

  • The period runs from the END OF THE PROCEDURE, not from the rejection of the individual candidate: a selection that drags on for two months keeps the first rejected applicants in the file for all that time.
  • For those who are hired the documents pass into the personnel file, but not all of them: what was lawfully collected during selection and is not needed for the employment relationship should be sorted out and not carried over.
  • The copy of the identity document, by contrast, must be kept for at least five years after the end of the calendar year in which employment ended. It is the only part of the file with a longer period of its own than the rest.
  • Copying an identity document by a party that is NOT the employer — a recruitment agency during the search phase, for instance — is a different matter and is generally not permitted.

The personnel file is not a single block

Putting one retention period on the whole file is always wrong, and wrong in two directions at once. Payroll administration must be kept seven years under Art. 52 of the Dutch tax code. The identity document copy five years from the end of the year employment ended. For the rest the authority points to two years after departure as a guideline. Seven years on everything keeps the appraisal record five years too long; two years on everything destroys payroll data five years too early.

The practical consequence for the record of processing activities: there is no such row as “personnel file”. There are three rows, with three periods and three legal bases, and merging them produces a record that looks complete and is two thirds wrong.

Looking for a workspace for your DPO work?

DPO Workspace is built by a certified DPO. 30-day free trial.

Start free

Related articles

Regulation
120days to charge you, not to fine you

The 120 days are not the deadline to fine you: they are the deadline to charge you

Anyone who built an appeal on the authority's delay should re-read the calendar. The Court clarifies three things: the complaint procedure and the sanctioning procedure are autonomous, so overrunning the nine-to-twelve months on the complaint does not extinguish the power to fine; the 120 days are for notifying the charge, not for imposing the fine; and they run from the «definitive finding», which is not the first notice but the moment the authority can assess every element — including the hearing of your side. After the charge, only the five-year limitation period remains.

Sep 20, 2026New 7 min
Regulation
10years of technical documentation, and two different clocks

The AI Act is a retention problem, and almost nobody is treating it as one

Everyone reads the AI Act as a risk-classification exercise. Underneath it there is a set of retention periods as concrete as anything in tax law: documentation kept ten years from placing on the market, logs kept at least six months, and incident reports due in fifteen, ten or two days. None of it fits in a record of processing that has one row for “AI system”.

Sep 18, 2026New 7 min
Regulation
16cases where Spanish law requires a DPO

When a DPO is mandatory in Spain: the sixteen cases in Article 34

Spain is one of the few Member States to have listed in statute the cases where a data protection officer is mandatory. Sixteen lettered items, a) to o), and they are additional to — not a replacement for — the three situations in Art. 37(1). The costliest mistake is not in the list: it is in paragraph 2, because an organisation that appoints a DPO voluntarily falls under the same regime and must notify the AEPD within ten days.

Sep 15, 2026New 6 min