**3.5 Access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels**

This fragment of substainable development goal 16, is become a serious point of concern due to the affaire of the day-care surtax. A damning judgment by a parliamentary investigation commission has led to the resignation of the Dutch government at January 15th of 2021. The report was titled 'Unprecedented Injustice' [69]. Here, we only discuss facts and judgments in relation to the sustainable development goal. It is also an example of how a resilience promoting policy had led to the inflicting of disadvantages on citizens and the creation of institutional distrust.

#### *An Explorative Perspective on the Resilience in Neighborhoods in the Netherlands DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.98818*

The day-care surtax originates from 2005. It is introduced to promote participation of parents, particularly of the mothers in the labor market. The surtax depends on the proportion between income and costs of purchased day-care. In that way, the surtax was aimed to supports houselholds which have insufficient income for use of day-care. From the beginning, legality checks on the intake of applications were absent or, later on, provisional. The Dutch tax authorities relied on the article in the day-care surtax act, which allowed this state agency to reclaim advances for a period of five years. Arbitrarily, the tax authorities have figured out an 'everything-ornothing' principle, meaning the response of an complete reclaim on any error in the application forms. The princinple excluded the option of a restatement of the level of surtax and the leniency of redemption arrangements. The principle is judged by the commission as being disproportional [69]. The effectuation of the reclaims has caused a cascade of household debts [70].

The title of the report is a reference to the fact that up to and including the highest national court the practice rules of the tax authorities have been confirmed. Therefore, the maltreated citizens have been excluded from access to justice as well [69]. Moreover, this crisis in the Dutch institutions is not yet revealed in full extent. It is reported and confirmed that clients with a double passport, being an indicator of a non-western migrant ancestry, is used to red flag surtax receiver on a personal attribute [71]. A following disclosure is the fact that tax authorities kept up and shared across three social domains a blacklist of 240,000 households or people of which attributes would predict fraud risks [72]. As the surtaxes serve to support the provision of basic needs of the household of which the incomes do not suffice, these people have been deliberately and multiply disadvantaged in their daily life. This state practice has, in spite of its inclusive goals, contributed to more inequality in the Dutch society.
