2025-02-17
Tax Payment enough to change the form of Taxation Method
Is a Tax Payment enough to change the form of Taxation Method? February is a crucial time for entrepreneurs considering a change in their taxation method—whether progressive taxation, flat tax, or lump-sum #tax. If their first income of the year was earned in January, they must notify the tax authority by the deadline for the January tax instalment, i.e., by February 20th. But did you know that a tax payment itself could serve as proof of such a change?
Is a Tax Payment enough to change the form of Taxation Method? February is a crucial time for entrepreneurs considering a change in their taxation method—whether progressive taxation, flat tax, or lump-sum tax. If their first income of the year was earned in January, they must notify the tax authority by the deadline for the January tax instalment, i.e., by February 20th. But did you know that a tax payment itself could serve as proof of such a change?
A recent tax ruling (ref. https://lnkd.in/dRmCGKVe) confirms that failing to submit a separate formal notification – whether through the entrepreneur register (CEIDG) or directly to the tax office – does not necessarily invalidate the change.
The Key Factor? An entrepreneur who switched from a flat tax to a lump-sum tax had consistently paid tax liabilities for two years using the correct payment reference code (for lump-sum tax: „PPE”). Despite lacking formal proof of notification, the tax authorities deemed the payment references sufficient to confirm the change in taxation method. The decisive conditions were:
• the first advance payment was made on time, in accordance with lump-sum tax regulations,
• the payment reference clearly indicated the new taxation method.
While formalities are important, precision in execution is equally crucial. This case highlights the significance of meticulous documentation—both in payment references and in the declaration process. Entrepreneurs should ensure that their tax payments accurately reflect their intended taxation method to avoid potential disputes.
See other articles
Determining when a VAT liability arises in relation to services remains one of the more challenging issues in practice under Polish VAT law. Although Article 19a(1) of the Polish VAT Act clearly states that VAT becomes due when a service is performed, establishing when a service is actually “performed” sometimes requires a case-by-case assessment of the contractual model and the underlying commercial reality. Recent Polish judgment by the Supreme Administrative Court of 31 March 2026 (I FSK 1353/23) provides important clarification in the context of IT services.
As the Polish National e-Invoicing System (KSeF) becomes more widely used, businesses are increasingly encountering a practical issue known as the “double document circulation.” This occurs when the structured invoice stored in KSeF (XML) differs from the PDF visualization sent to the customer, for example by email or through a customer portal.
On 11 February, the EU General Court (Case T-689/24) delivered an important judgment in a “Polish case” on the moment of input VAT deduction. The ruling may have far-reaching consequences for Polish businesses and the way VAT is settled in Poland.
Invoice Issued Outside KSeF and Tax-Deductible Costs. Key Position of the Polish tax administration.
Individual tax ruling of 9 January 2026, ref. 0111-KDIB1-3.4010.714.2025.2.JG In an individual tax ruling dated 9 January 2026, the Director of the Polish National Revenue Information (KIS) addressed an issue that has raised significant practical concerns in the context of the implementation of the National e-Invoicing System (KSeF). The key question was whether an expense documented by an invoice issued outside the KSeF-system may be treated as a tax-deductible cost for the purposes of Polish corporate income tax (CIT).
The introduction of the mandatory Polish e-invoicing system (Krajowy System e-Faktur – KSeF) as of 1 February 2026 will significantly change VAT invoicing rules, i.a. transactions involving foreign entities. One of the key factors determining whether mandatory KSeF applies is whether a foreign counterparty has a fixed establishment (FE) in Poland. If it is lacking on the seller’s side, then he may issue and send invoices outside KSeF (e.g. via e-mail, PDF). If the seller is subject to KSeF yet his buyer is not (lacking seat/FE in Poland), then the seller must issue the invoice via KSeF, yet simultaneously send it to his buyer in the old-fashioned way.
The general tax ruling issued by the Polish Minister of Finance and Economy on 27th of November 2025 addresses the issue of land, buildings and structures being deemed as “related to business activity”. It is one of the most significant documents in recent years in the area of property taxation. Its importance goes well beyond a purely technical explanation of statutory provisions. At its core, it touches on a fundamental and long-running dispute between taxpayers and tax authorities: where the line should be drawn between mere ownership of real estate and its use for business purposes.
Even though penalties for issuing invoices outside Poland’s National e-Invoicing System (KSeF) have been deferred until 1 January 2027, the real headache may come sooner.
The Court held that, in certain circumstances, contractual penalties for delays may qualify as tax-deductible in Polish CIT. The case concerned a property developer unable to hand over apartments to clients in time, due to delays caused by the general contractor. The clients charged contractual penalties, which the developer has paid and qualified as tax-deductible costs. The Polish tax authority (KIS) argued that any penalty for non-performance or improper performance is excluded from tax costs under Art. 16(1)(22) of the Polish CIT Act. The Polish Supreme Administrative Court (NSA) disagreed.
CJEU: Is a TP profit true-up a service? Key takeaways from 4 Sep 2025 (C-726/23, Arcomet) The Court held that intra-group payments determined under TNMM (e.g., skimming part of a subsidiary’s operating margin above a threshold) can be deemed as consideration for services and thus fall within VAT—if there is a legal relationship and a direct link between the supply and the consideration.
Is a plot of land with a building scheduled for demolition considered ‘undeveloped land’? Under the Polish VAT Act, the sale of undeveloped land is exempt from VAT as long as it does not have the status of ‘building land’. Otherwise, such sale might be subject to 23% VAT. In contrast, the VAT on a sale of a developed plot of land is determined based on the history of the buildings/structures. In general: older buildings = VAT-exemption. A recurring question, however, is how to classify land where there are buildings or structures in poor condition that are intended to be demolished. Can such a property still be treated as “developed” for VAT purposes? The question might seem irrelevant, yet there is another layer to it. According to Polish tax law, if the sale of immovable property (plot, building) is not subject to VAT at all or is VAT-exempt, the buyer must pay a 2% tax on civil law transactions (Podatek od czynnosci cywilnoprawnych, also known as PCC). Thus, many B2B-sales aim at having the transaction taxed with VAT (deductible) to avoid PCC (non-deductible).