Category: Bez kategorii

JPK_CIT has permanently changed the landscape of Polish accounting and tax reporting. The Standard Audit File for CIT taxpayers (commonly known as JPK_CIT) is no longer a distant plan of the Ministry of Finance – it has become a real requirement. This reform, based on the digitalisation of accounting books, has imposed on businesses an obligation to transmit data in a structured XML format.

Who must report, and when?

What does the new JPK_KR_PD structure look like?

Has the submission deadline been extended?

Below is a detailed analysis of the regulations in force in 2026.

 

What is JPK_CIT and why is it a revolution?

The introduction of the Standard Audit File for CIT is one of the final elements of tightening Poland’s tax system. Until now, tax authorities (KAS) could access accounting books mainly on demand – during inspections. From 2026 onwards (for the largest entities), this process becomes automatic and cyclical.

In practice, JPK_CIT is not a single file, but a new reporting standard that covers two main logical structures (schemas):

1. JPK_KR_PD – accounting books with corporate income tax data (an extension of the existing JPK_KR file).
2. JPK_ST_KR – a register of fixed assets and intangible assets (this obligation has been temporarily deferred).

The Ministry of Finance aims to be able to remotely verify the correctness of CIT settlements without the need to visit the company’s premises.

 

JPK_CIT implementation schedule: who does it apply to and from when?

The legislator has divided taxpayers into three groups, gradually extending the obligation to successive market sectors. It is essential to establish which group your company belongs to in order to prepare adequately for the new reporting obligations.

1. Group of “Large Taxpayers” and Tax Capital Groups (reporting for the 2025 tax year)

   These are the entities leading the way. The obligation to submit the JPK_KR_PD file for the 2025 tax year applies to:

   • Tax Capital Groups (PGK) – regardless of revenue.
   • The largest CIT taxpayers – companies whose revenue in the previous tax year (i.e. 2024) exceeded EUR 50 million.

   For these entities, Q2 2026 is the time to finalise the closing of books and generate XML files compliant with the latest schema published by the Ministry of Finance.

2. Group of VAT Taxpayers (obligation starting from 1 January 2026)

   This is the largest group, which has been in the reporting period for several months. It covers all CIT taxpayers who did not meet the EUR 50 million revenue threshold but are required to submit JPK_VAT records.

   • Important: This applies exclusively to taxpayers filing monthly VAT returns (JPK_V7M).
   • Obligation: From the first day of the tax year beginning after 31 December 2025 (i.e. typically from 1 January 2026), they must maintain books in a manner that enables JPK_CIT to be generated in the future.
   • First submission: Will take place in 2027 (for the 2026 tax year).

3. Group of Remaining Taxpayers (starting in 2027)

   This group includes entities filing quarterly JPK_VAT returns, entities not registered or registered as VAT-exempt, and specific organisations (e.g. family foundations). For them, the JPK_CIT reporting obligation will not apply until the tax year beginning after 31 December 2026.

 

JPK_CIT submission deadline: 31 March or 31 July 2026?

Under the CIT Act, the standard deadline for submitting accounting books in electronic form is the deadline for filing the annual CIT-8 return – i.e. the end of the third month after the close of the tax year (typically 31 March).

However, given the scale of technological challenges, the Ministry of Finance issued a regulation extending the deadline for the first year of reporting.

• New deadline: Under the regulation, for the largest taxpayers (Group I) the deadline for submitting JPK_KR_PD for 2025 has been moved to 31 July 2026.

In addition, advanced legislative work is underway to extend the JPK_CIT submission deadline for all CIT taxpayers subject to this obligation – the new deadline provides for submission of JPK_CIT by the end of the seventh month after the close of the tax or financial year.

The extended deadline will cover both JPK_KR_PD and JPK_ST_KR.

 

Logical structure of JPK_KR_PD – what does the file contain?

The new schema is much more than a digital balance sheet. It requires the “tagging” of accounting data so that the Ministry of Finance’s algorithms can understand the company’s tax specifics.

 

Key elements of the JPK_KR_PD structure:

1. Account tags (tax and accounting tags)*: The taxpayer must assign special tags from the Ministry of Finance’s dictionary to their chart of accounts. Tax tags distinguish, among others:
   • Non-taxable income – broken down into permanently and temporarily non-taxable revenue;
   • Costs permanently not constituting tax-deductible expenses (NKUP);
   • Costs not constituting tax-deductible expenses (NKUP) in the current year;
   • Tax-deductible costs and revenues in the current year, recognised in prior-year books;
   • Tax-exempt income;
   • Costs related to research and development activities.
2. Journal – a detailed record of all business transactions entered in the taxpayer’s accounting books.
3. Counterparty data in the journal: Every accounting entry relating to a transaction with a counterparty must include that party’s Counterparty Number, which is then linked to the Tax Identification Number (NIP) in the Counterparty register. This is a revolutionary change for companies that have previously posted cost invoices collectively or without full entity-level analytics in the general ledger.
4. RPD note – a summary reconciliation of the tax result to the accounting result, specifying the differentiating items (optional for 2025).

* The application of tags for entities preparing their financial statements under IFRS has been deferred to the tax year beginning on 1 January 2028.

 

Penalties and fiscal penal liability

Disregarding the new reporting obligations carries the risk of liability under the Fiscal Penal Code (KKS).

• Failure to submit the JPK_CIT file: May be treated as obstruction of a tax inspection or failure to fulfil a reporting obligation, subject to a fine.
• Submission of an unreliable file: If the data in the XML file (e.g. KUP/NKUP tags) is inconsistent with the actual state of affairs and results in an understatement of the tax liability, penalties may be significantly higher.
• Personal liability: Responsibility for the correctness of the books and JPK reporting lies with the head of the entity (Management Board) and persons entrusted with managing financial affairs (e.g. the CFO, Chief Accountant).

 

FAQ – JPK_CIT: questions and answers

 

If I am a quarterly VAT taxpayer, does JPK_CIT not apply to me in 2026?

That is correct. The legislator has included in the group starting in 2026 only those taxpayers who are required to submit monthly VAT records (filing JPK_V7M). If you file JPK_V7K, you must adapt your books from 1 January 2027.

 

Does JPK_CIT replace the CIT-8 return?

No. The CIT-8 return remains mandatory, regardless of the introduction of JPK_CIT. JPK_KR_PD is a supplementary document serving inspection and analytical purposes.

 

Do I need to use KSeF to submit JPK_CIT?

Formally, these are two independent obligations and systems; however, they are closely linked analytically. The KSeF invoice number should appear in the records, and the Head of KAS will use KSeF data to validate the accuracy of entries in JPK_CIT and JPK_VAT.

 

Can an accounting firm sign JPK_CIT?

Advanced legislative work is underway to introduce provisions that would allow tax books in income taxes to be signed on the basis of a power of attorney for signing declarations submitted by electronic means of communication (UPL-1). This solution will enable accounting firms to sign JPK_CIT.

 

Sources and legal basis (as of April 2026)

• Act of 29 October 2021 amending the Personal Income Tax Act, the Corporate Income Tax Act and certain other acts – the act introducing JPK_CIT and setting reporting deadlines for individual groups of taxpayers;
• Act of 15 February 1992 on corporate income tax – legal basis for submitting books in JPK_CIT format;
• Regulation of the Minister of Finance of 16 August 2024 on additional data with which accounting books subject to submission under the Corporate Income Tax Act must be supplemented – specification of additional data required in JPK_CIT;
• Regulation of the Minister of Finance of 13 December 2024 on the exemption from the obligation to submit parts of accounting books under the Corporate Income Tax Act – exemption from submitting the fixed assets and intangible assets register;
• Regulation of the Minister of Finance and Economy of 15 December 2025 amending the regulation on additional data with which accounting books subject to submission under the Corporate Income Tax Act must be supplemented – exemption from applying account tags for entities preparing financial statements under IFRS;
• Regulation of the Minister of Finance and Economy of 16 February 2026 on the extension of deadlines for submitting accounting books in respect of corporate income tax – extension of the JPK_CIT submission deadline;
• Act of 10 September 1999 – Fiscal Penal Code – penalties for failure to submit, errors or delays in JPK_CIT submission;
• Technical documentation of the Ministry of Finance – official XSD schemas and information brochures published on the podatki.gov.pl portal.

 

ALTO’s support in the area of JPK_CIT

Implementing JPK_CIT is a process that requires combining accounting and tax expertise with IT knowledge. If you wish to verify whether your company is ready to report in 2026, or if you need support in preparing for the new reporting obligation – contact our experts.

Our team will assist with analysing existing accounting and tax processes and adapting them to JPK_CIT requirements, ensuring full compliance with the Minister of Finance’s regulation.

We offer support with both the technical aspects of reporting, such as system configuration or the use of the ALTOOL JPK_CIT application enabling reporting, and substantive guidance on interpreting the new regulations. Drawing on our experience, ALTO can help companies identify areas requiring improvement, implement appropriate control procedures and ensure a smooth transition to the new legal requirements.

Contact us to obtain detailed information on JPK_CIT support and other tax and accounting services offered by ALTO.

The expansion relief, although intended to support the growth of Polish companies, is increasingly becoming the subject of disputes with the tax authorities and courts.

The most recent Supreme Administrative Court (NSA) rulings clearly narrow the possibility of using the preference by entrepreneurs outsourcing production to third parties. In addition, disputes concerning the interpretation of “products not previously offered” – a key concept for eligibility – are dominated by a restrictive approach.

Below we analyse the current positions of tax authorities and courts, and their practical implications.

 

What is the expansion relief and what conditions must taxpayers meet?

The expansion relief, regulated under Article 18eb of the CIT Act, allows taxpayers to deduct – in addition to the standard cost recognition – expenditure incurred to increase revenue from product sales. The maximum deduction is PLN 1,000,000 per tax year.

The catalogue of qualifying costs includes, among others:

• promotional activities,
• participation in trade fairs,
• preparation of documentation enabling the sale of products (including product certification),
• adaptation of product packaging to meet customer requirements.

A taxpayer may use the deduction if, within two consecutive tax years (counted from the year in which costs related to revenue growth were incurred), at least one of the following conditions is met:

• an increase in revenue from the sale of existing products,
• achieving revenue from the sale of products not previously offered, or
• achieving revenue from the sale of products not previously offered in a given country.

Practice shows that the key disputes concern two issues: whether a taxpayer outsourcing production to third parties may use the preference, and how to define a product “not previously offered”.

 

Outsourced production and the expansion relief – a uniform and restrictive line of case law

A particular source of controversy is the eligibility of entities that do not carry out their own production but instead outsource manufacturing to external parties. In recent years, administrative courts have issued a series of rulings which – though delivered at different times and in different factual circumstances – consistently point in one direction: they narrow the interpretation of “product manufacturing” within the expansion relief.

One of the most recent cases concerned a taxpayer operating in the brewing industry who does not carry out its own production. The company was responsible for developing recipes and quality standards, while the actual brewing was outsourced to external subcontractors. The finished product was then sent to a bottling facility where the company packaged it into bottles, cans and kegs before selling it to shops, restaurants and distributors.

The Director of the National Revenue Information Service (0111-KDIB2-1.4010.378.2022.1.AR) and subsequently the Regional Administrative Court (WSA) in Bydgoszcz (I SA/Bd 8/23) held that merely developing a recipe, supervising the process or packaging the product does not constitute manufacturing activity. The court indicated that, for the purposes of the relief, actual production of goods is required – not merely participation in the production process in the capacity of the commissioning party.

This position was unequivocally upheld by the Supreme Administrative Court (II FSK 798/23). The NSA held that outsourcing production to third parties precludes fulfilment of the “product manufacturing” condition for the purposes of the expansion relief.

 

Outsourced production – a uniform interpretation

The NSA adopted a similar position in December 2025 in a case concerning a cosmetics company (II FSK 406/23).

An equally restrictive interpretation of outsourced production is presented in rulings of the Regional Administrative Courts in Poznań (I SA/Po 822/23), Lublin (I SA/Lu 33/23) and Gliwice (I SA/Gl 1280/23).

It can therefore be concluded that the courts consistently confirm that an entity outsourcing the manufacturing of products to subcontractors does not meet the “product manufacturing” condition and therefore cannot benefit from the expansion relief.

 

Products not previously offered

The second area of dispute concerning the expansion relief is the interpretation of “products not previously offered”. This term appears in the legislation, but the legislator chose not to define it. The absence of a statutory definition has led tax authorities to rely on non-normative materials – primarily the draft tax explanations on the expansion relief provisions of 25 September 2023 – even though this document was never issued in final form and has no binding force.

 

Restrictive position of authorities and unfavourable WSA case law

In an interpretation of 23 August 2024 (0111-KDIB1-3.4010.324.2024.1.JG), the authority – citing the draft tax explanations – indicated that a product “not previously offered” must differ from previous products in kind, not merely in quality, composition or target customer group.

As a result, the authority concluded that if a company producing waters and beverages intends to introduce new variants to the market – even those clearly differing in recipe, technology or properties – these will not constitute “products not previously offered”.

An analogous position was taken by the Regional Administrative Court in Warsaw in rulings of 10 January 2025 (III SA/Wa 2504/24) and 15 April 2025 (III SA/Wa 426/25).

As a consequence, this line of interpretation holds that:

• a change in composition, technology or packaging is a modification, not the creation of a new product,
• an entrepreneur who does not categorically change their industry or product group essentially does not meet the statutory condition.

Such a far-reaching interpretation leads in practice to absurd outcomes – for example, a fizzy drinks manufacturer would be unable to obtain the relief after commencing juice production, even though the average consumer regards these products as entirely different.

 

Functionality and market segment as a criterion for “novelty”

The Regional Administrative Court in Gliwice diverged from this restrictive trend, issuing a taxpayer-friendly ruling (I SA/Gl 1356/24). The court expressly stated that the classification of products within the relief should not be so narrow.

The WSA noted that the beverages market is inherently diverse – encompassing, among others, carbonated drinks, still drinks, waters, juices, isotonic, energy and vitamin drinks. Each of these constitutes a distinct type of product, differing in properties, intended use and target consumer. Therefore, if a taxpayer has previously produced only still water and plans to introduce sparkling or highly mineralised water, these are “products not previously offered”.

This ruling gives the concept of a “new product” a meaning that takes into account:

• the actual market segment,
• the intended use and functional characteristics of the product,
• the perception of differences by consumers,
• the role of functional and technological changes in the product portfolio.

The court also observed that the definition of novelty must be practical and reflect market realities – otherwise the relief would essentially fail to achieve its purpose.

 

The expansion relief requires an interpretive correction

Such an interpretation is out of step with modern business realities – outsourcing production is today the norm, and entrepreneurs typically develop their offering within their existing business profile rather than by introducing products that are “categorically different”.

Although in the case of outsourced production it is difficult to entirely disregard the literal wording of the legislation, particularly with regard to the concept of “products not previously offered”, the tax authorities are creating additional restrictions that do not follow from the statute.

As a result, such a restrictive interpretation not only excessively narrows access to the expansion relief, but also undermines its pro-growth purpose – which clearly shows that this is an area requiring urgent revision, whether at the level of interpretation or legislative intervention.

 

If you are considering implementing or reviewing tax reliefs in your organisation – including the expansion relief, robotisation relief, innovative employees relief, R&D relief or others – contact the ALTO Advisory experts!

The CSRD Directive, or the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, is a regulation that has fundamentally changed the business landscape. Although the original scope was very broad, a series of amendments in 2025–2026 has made this process a challenge not only operationally but also legally for many companies.

As of April 2026, this topic is no longer merely theoretical – the provisions have entered into force, but recent changes to the reporting thresholds and the so-called “stop-the-clock” directive have significantly shifted the timeline.

In this article we explain how these regulations affect business, what ESRS standards are, and why reliable sustainability reporting remains a priority for management boards despite the changing thresholds.

 

What is CSRD and what does it mean for companies in Poland?

CSRD stands for Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive. It is a landmark piece of legislation that replaced the previous NFRD (Non-Financial Reporting Directive). The legislator’s main objective is to ensure that every investor or bank has access to comparable data on a company’s impact on the environment and society.

In Poland, the legal situation regarding non-financial reporting has been subject to rapid change in recent months. Although the original transposition of the CSRD took place through the Act of 6 December 2024, subsequent modifications resulted from the adoption at EU level of the Omnibus I simplification package.

A key moment was the publication on 13 March 2026 of the Act of 27 February 2026 amending the Accounting Act, which transposes into Polish law the option of exemption from ESG reporting for 2025 and 2026. This Act implements EU Directive 2026/470 and introduces a significant relaxation of reporting obligations through a substantial raising of thresholds. From 2027, reporting will apply only to the largest companies employing more than 1,000 employees and achieving very high revenues.

In practice, this means that many companies that prepared an ESG report for 2024 may lawfully refrain from reporting for 2025 and 2026, provided they do not meet the new criteria. This decision is voluntary and rests with the company’s management board.

 

CSRD versus NFRD – how the approach to data is changing

CSRD significantly raises the quality and verification requirements for non-financial data. Even with the reduced number of entities in scope in 2026, the standard remains uncompromising.

The key pillars of change are:

• Precision: The reporting process under CSRD can no longer be based on self-selected indicators – ESRS standards are mandatory.
• Digitalisation: Reports must be prepared in XHTML format.
• Verification: Reporting must be confirmed by a statutory auditor (assurance). As a result, an ESG report carries the same weight as annual financial reporting.

 

Who is subject to the obligation in 2026? (Current schedule)

This is the key question for every manager this year. As a result of the European Parliament’s decision in December 2025, the reporting obligation has been drastically limited to the largest entities.

The position as of April 2026 is as follows:

• New main threshold: Under the latest changes, the ESG reporting obligation now applies only to entities meeting two conditions: more than 1,000 employees and net revenues above EUR 450 million.
• Wave I (reporting for 2024): The largest public-interest entities (under the old thresholds) submitted reports in 2025. Under the new Act published on 13 March 2026, if these entities do not meet the new thresholds, they may voluntarily take advantage of the exemption from ESG reporting for 2025 and 2026.
• Waves II and III – deferral (“stop-the-clock”): Other large entities and listed SMEs have been given more time. Their deadlines are now 2028 (for 2027) and 2029 (for 2028) respectively.

Under the rules in force since March 2026, companies employing fewer than 1,000 employees are no longer in a state of regulatory uncertainty. Under the new thresholds they are not within the target scope of the CSRD and may lawfully refrain from ESG reporting for 2025 and 2026, provided that an informed decision to this effect is taken by the management board.

It is worth noting, however, that March 2026 was for many organisations the month in which reports were published – reports prepared under conditions of prolonged regulatory uncertainty. Some companies, despite the opening of a path to exemption, chose to publish a report for 2025, driven by, among other things, the need for reporting continuity, the expectations of stakeholders, banks and business partners, or a desire to consolidate the maturity of ESG processes within the organisation.

 

What specifically must be disclosed? ESG areas and standards

To meet the rigorous requirements of CSRD, an organisation must prepare a report based on the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). It covers three main areas:

• Environmental (E): Climate change, pollution, water, biodiversity and ecosystems, and circular economy.
• Social (S): The situation of own employees and those throughout the value chain, affected communities, consumers and end users.
• Governance (G): Business conduct, including business ethics and management transparency.

 

Double materiality – the heart of the process

The foundation is the double materiality assessment. Every entity must assess reality from two perspectives: the company’s impact on its surroundings, and financial considerations (how ESG risks and opportunities affect the company’s financial results). Only material issues are included in the report, and this process must be thoroughly documented for the auditor.

 

How to prepare your company for CSRD – a practical guide for 2026

Implementing the directive’s requirements calls for a systematic approach:

1. Gap analysis: Assessment of ESG data availability and the degree to which policies and procedures have been implemented.
2. Legislative monitoring: Tracking work on simplified ESRS standards and observing what final solutions are adopted in the legislative process.
3. Data management: Organising information on what ESG data is already available within the organisation, where it is held and who is responsible for it, so that the company can prepare efficiently for reporting.
4. Cooperation with the auditor: Preparing processes for verification by a statutory auditor.

 

CSRD and the value chain – indirect obligations for smaller companies

Despite the raising of the threshold to 1,000 employees, the CSRD indirectly affects many more companies. The largest players collect data from their entire supply chain (upstream and downstream). In March 2026, smaller businesses are receiving large volumes of enquiries about carbon footprints and labour standards. Companies that are able to respond to these are building a significant competitive advantage.

 

Summary: ESG in Poland after the 2026 changes

The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive has evolved towards simplification and reducing the burden on smaller businesses. 2026 is a year of scrutiny for the largest entities (above 1,000 employees) and a time of strategic calm for the rest of the market. It is worth bearing in mind, however, that ESRS standards are becoming the universal language of European business.

 

FAQ – Questions about the new regulations

 

What is the “stop-the-clock” directive?

This is a 2025 regulation that deferred reporting deadlines for medium-sized and smaller entities by two years.

 

Is the 250-employee threshold still applicable under CSRD?

Following the December 2025 changes, the threshold was raised to 1,000 employees, which significantly narrowed the group of companies subject to the direct reporting obligation.

 

Does an ESG report need to be verified by an auditor?

Yes – regardless of the size of the company, if it falls within the scope of CSRD, its report must undergo an assurance process conducted by a statutory auditor.

 

Sources:

• Directive (EU) 2022/2464 (CSRD).
• “Stop-the-clock” Directive (EU) 2025/794.
• Draft Act UC136 (introducing the 1,000-employee and EUR 450 million revenue thresholds).
• Act of 27 February 2026 amending the Accounting Act.

Having spent several years working at a SaaS company, I remember one thing clearly: even the most refined technological processes do not entirely eliminate the risk of error. Software development teams operate with extensive quality control procedures. Automated testing, code review, continuous integration processes and security audits are all designed to reduce the risk of defects in IT systems. Yet anyone who has worked in software development knows that sooner or later a situation arises where something behaves differently than intended.

The problem begins when a bug in the code stops being purely a technical issue and starts having real business consequences. If a system defect causes an application outage, data loss or disruption to a client’s processes, the question of the technology provider’s liability arises. In such situations, another question naturally follows: can the consequences of such an event be covered by insurance?

In practice, a well-designed professional liability insurance programme for IT companies can cover this type of risk. The technology sector has a specific form of insurance protection known as professional liability insurance for IT companies, often referred to as Technology Errors & Omissions (Tech E&O). It is built on the premise that damage may arise as a result of an error, negligence or improper performance of IT services.

 

What damage can a bug in the code cause?

The specific nature of technology business means that damage rarely takes a material form. Far more commonly, losses are financial in nature, resulting from disruption to the IT systems on which businesses depend.

In the IT sector, losses very often take the form of so-called pure financial losses – economic losses suffered by a client that are not connected with property damage or personal injury. In practice, they may arise from, for example, a system outage, a software error or incorrect data processing. From an insurance perspective, this is a significant distinction, because standard commercial liability insurance focuses primarily on personal injury and property damage, whereas technology projects most commonly involve the economic consequences of errors in IT systems.

 

An example of a pure financial loss

An IT company implemented an e-commerce order management system for a client. Due to a bug in the code, some orders were not being correctly recorded in the system. For several hours, the shop was accepting orders that were not being processed. The client had to refund payments, handle complaints and suffered losses resulting from the interruption to sales. This is a case of a pure financial loss, because no property damage or personal injury occurred, yet the business suffered a real economic loss as a result of the software defect.

The most commonly encountered situations include:

• unavailability of a system or application, leading to an interruption in the client’s operations,
• incorrect data processing, which may result in erroneous settlements or financial transactions,
• loss or corruption of data, which is of critical operational importance to many businesses,
• disruption to IT infrastructure, such as sales, logistics or production systems,
• financial losses resulting from the unavailability of digital services.

In such situations, a client may seek compensation from the technology provider, arguing that the damage arose from a defect in the software. Particularly in projects carried out for large organisations or under international contracts, the scale of potential claims can be significant.

Furthermore, depending on the nature of the project and the scope of liability, some data-related risks may require the programme to be supplemented with cyber insurance.

 

How does professional liability insurance for IT companies work?

Professional liability insurance in the technology sector is designed to protect a business against the financial consequences of claims arising from civil liability for IT services performed. Depending on the policy structure, cover may include, among other things:

• compensation payable to the client, where the IT company’s liability for the damage is established,
• legal defence costs, including lawyers’ fees and court proceedings costs,
• technical expert fees, which help establish the cause of the error and the scope of liability,
• settlement costs, where the parties decide to resolve the dispute amicably.

It is worth noting that many professional liability policies operate on a claims-made basis. This means that insurance cover applies to claims notified during the policy period, even if the event giving rise to the claim occurred earlier, provided it falls within the retroactive period specified in the policy.

 

Exclusions in IT liability policies – when can an insurer refuse to pay a claim?

As with most legal and financial instruments, the details are critical here. The mere fact of holding IT professional liability insurance does not mean that every situation involving a bug in the code will be covered.

The most commonly encountered exclusions relate in particular to:

• intentional acts or deliberate breaches of the law,
• guarantees of achieving a specific result that go beyond standard professional liability,
• contractual penalties, which are not generally covered unless expressly included in the policy,
• intellectual property infringement, unless the policy provides for such an extension.

In practice, this means that the effectiveness of insurance protection depends not only on holding a policy, but also on its scope and the nature of the business conducted by the technology company.

 

Technology contracts and insurance cover – how contract terms define IT risk

It is impossible to analyse liability for a bug in the code in isolation from the contracts concluded between IT companies and their clients. In practice, it is the technology contract that largely defines the scope of the software provider’s liability.

Such agreements frequently contain provisions relating to, among other things:

• limitation of liability clauses,
• system availability levels specified in SLA agreements,
• liability for data loss,
• the obligation for the technology service provider to hold insurance.

In many projects, particularly those carried out for large organisations or international clients, holding an appropriate professional liability policy is today a market standard.

 

Professional liability policy in the technology sector – market standard or optional extra?

The question of whether insurance will cover a bug in the code has no single universal answer. In many cases, a well-structured professional liability policy for the IT sector can cover both the compensation payable to the client and the costs associated with dispute proceedings. The ultimate scope of cover depends, however, on the terms of the insurance contract, the nature of the technology project and the content of the contract concluded with the client.

It can therefore be said that in a world where software is becoming the foundation of modern business operations, professional liability insurance is no longer merely a formal add-on. Increasingly, it forms part of contractual and operational risk management in technology business.

The energy, fuel and gas sector has for years faced a restrictive approach from the regulatory authorities. However, recent months have brought a breakthrough. The latest rulings of the Constitutional Tribunal (TK) open the door for businesses to recover millions in overpayments.

If your company has been paying annual licensing fees to the President of the Energy Regulatory Office (URE), you may be entitled to seek a refund. Below we set out what rights businesses have under the latest case law and how to make use of them.

 

Unconstitutional licensing fee

One area offering a real opportunity to recover funds is the licensing fee paid to the Energy Regulatory Office (URE). This concerns entities operating in the electricity, heat, gas and liquid fuels sectors.

 

Landmark ruling of the Constitutional Tribunal

In August 2025, the Constitutional Tribunal issued a landmark ruling that challenged the status quo of the fee collection system. The Tribunal found the provisions of the regulation governing the calculation of licensing fees to be unconstitutional.

 

The Tribunal’s main objections concerned the fact that:

• Key elements of the levy (such as the basis of calculation, revenue multipliers and coefficients) were set out in a regulation rather than in an act of parliament.
• Such a structure violates the provisions of the Polish Constitution, which require every public levy to be based directly on a statutory act.

 

What does this mean for businesses?

Since the provisions on the basis of which fees were calculated and collected have been found to be incompatible with the Constitution, licensed entities have gained a strong basis for:

1. Applying for a refund of unduly collected fees for the years 2020–2025.
2. Potentially even challenging current assessments based on the defective legal basis.

 

How can ALTO Advisory help your company?

Before initiating the recovery process, it is necessary to develop a strategy that will then be implemented at the stage of the dispute with the authority. Our team of experts offers comprehensive support in this area, including:

• ANALYSIS: We will examine in detail the fees paid by your company to the URE in recent years.
• ASSESSMENT: We will identify the specific amounts that may be recoverable and present the prospects for their recovery.
• STRATEGY: We will prepare applications for a determination of overpayment, corrections, and represent your company before tax authorities and courts.

Consult with us and find out how much you can recover.

Posting employees abroad as part of service provision requires detailed knowledge of employer obligations regarding tax settlements, social security contributions and the interpretation of labour law in an international context. Below we set out the key regulations in force at the turn of 2025 and 2026.

 

What is global mobility and the posting of employees?

Global mobility refers to the international movement of personnel between different locations within a company’s operations. It encompasses the posting of an employee abroad – i.e. the temporary secondment of an employee to work in another EU Member State, European Economic Area country or Switzerland, where the employee retains their employment relationship with the Polish employer and returns to Poland upon completion of the posting period. Other forms include remote work from abroad and international contracts.

Tax residency is of key importance. A Polish tax resident is a person whose centre of vital interests is in Poland (family, primary income) or who stays in Poland for more than 183 days per year.

An important addition: In practice, resident status may be acquired even before the 183-day threshold is reached, if the centre of vital interests (e.g. permanent home) is transferred to Poland. A resident is subject to tax on their worldwide income in Poland, whereas a non-resident is taxed only on income from Polish sources.

 

Posting of employees – types and employer obligations

Short-term and long-term posting

The rules on posting are governed by three EU directives: 96/71/EC, 2014/67/EU and (EU) 2018/957. In Poland, the key legislation is the Act on the Posting of Workers in the Framework of the Provision of Services.

• Posting of up to 12 months requires the employer to ensure the minimum working conditions of the host country (including rest periods, leave, overtime rates and health and safety).
• After exceeding 12 months (with the option of extension to 18 months upon notification to the National Labour Inspectorate), the employer must apply all employment conditions of the host country. It is important to note that posting periods for the same position are cumulative, even where successive employees fill the role or where they are sent by a temporary work agency.

 

Form A1 – employer obligation

Form A1 confirms that, during work in another country, the employee is subject to Polish social insurance. This means that social insurance contributions are paid in Poland for a maximum of 24 months. The application must be submitted exclusively electronically via the PUE ZUS (eZUS) platform using form US-3. The absence of the certificate results in severe financial penalties imposed by foreign inspection authorities (e.g. the French SIPSI or the German Zollamt).

 

Double taxation treaties (DTTs) and the 183-day rule

Double taxation treaties determine the rules for taxing the remuneration of posted employees. Typically, Article 15 of a DTT provides that remuneration is taxed in Poland if, cumulatively: the employee is present in the country of work for no more than 183 days, the remuneration is paid by a Polish employer, and the employer has no permanent establishment abroad.

Note on the MLI Convention: Many treaties (e.g. with the United Kingdom, Norway and Belgium) have been amended. The exemption with progression method has been replaced in these treaties by the proportional credit method, which changes the way income is reported on the PIT-11 form and requires the employee to settle tax in their annual return. The method of counting the 183 days may also differ (calendar year vs any 12-month period) – this should be verified in the specific treaty.

 

Per diems for posted employees and business travel

Per diems are payable in the case of a business trip. In the case of a permanent posting, the employee receives their basic salary without per diems, unless the contract provides otherwise. Supreme Administrative Court (NSA) rulings from 2023–2024 (including II FSK 270/21) held that the provision of transport and accommodation for posted employees does not constitute taxable income for those employees.

Daily per diem rates for international travel (PIT and social security exemption limits) for 2026:

• Germany: EUR 49
• Netherlands: EUR 50
• France: EUR 55
• Norway: NOK 450
• Sweden: EUR 45
• United Kingdom: GBP 45

 

Employing non-residents in Poland – withholding agent obligations

The employer, acting as a withholding agent, collects advance income tax payments on a non-resident’s income from Polish sources. Where work is performed in Poland for a Polish entity, the concept of the so-called economic employer applies, which gives rise to an obligation to issue a PIT-11 form.

Where a non-resident presents a certificate of residency and the applicable treaty provides for taxation only in the country of residence, the employer may refrain from collecting advance tax payments and instead submit form IFT-1R by the end of February. It should be noted, however, that the certificate must be current and cover the period during which the income was earned.

 

Employment contract vs civil law contract with a non-resident

Under an employment contract, the employer always acts as a withholding agent (unless a DTT and certificate of residency exempt the income from tax). Under a civil law contract, the principal acts as a withholding agent if the work is performed on Polish territory. As regards social security, nationals of third countries generally require full contributions to be paid, unless Poland has concluded a social security agreement with the relevant country (e.g. with Ukraine).

 

Common errors and tax risks

The most common errors include:

• Incorrect determination of residency (failure to verify the centre of vital interests).
• Application of double taxation relief methods without taking into account the changes introduced by the MLI.
• Absence of a current certificate of residency when applying exemptions.
• Failure to maintain accurate records of days of presence and place of work.

 

Summary and good practices

Key obligations include obtaining Form A1, monitoring posting periods (12, 18 and 24 months) and correct reporting on PIT-11 and IFT-1R forms. The following are recommended:

1. Maintaining a detailed “travel calendar”.
2. Periodic verification of residency status (particularly in the case of hybrid working).
3. Archiving employees’ declarations regarding their personal situation.

In cases of doubt regarding the posting of employees abroad or the employment of non-residents, we recommend consulting a tax adviser specialising in international employee mobility.

 

Sources:

• EU Directives 96/71/EC, 2014/67/EU, 2018/957;
• Act on the Posting of Workers;
• EU Regulation 883/2004;
• Personal Income Tax Act;
• MLI Convention;
• ALTO own publications 2025.

 

Legal status: January 2026

Poland is on the threshold of a digital revolution in invoicing. The National e-Invoice System (KSeF) will change the way businesses issue and receive sales documents. Although the system has been operating on a voluntary basis since 2022, it will become mandatory for the largest companies from 1 February 2026, with KSeF extending to all remaining taxpayers from 1 April 2026.

The Ministry of Finance confirms that these deadlines are final – technical work is progressing according to plan, and KSeF invoices will come into force despite calls from the accounting and business community for another postponement.

In this guide we explain what KSeF is and what it is for, how the national e-invoice system works, and answer the most frequently asked questions from businesses ahead of the KSeF implementation.

What is KSeF? Definition and fundamentals of the system

KSeF is a nationwide IT platform managed by the Ministry of Finance, used for issuing, transmitting, receiving and storing structured invoices. The KSeF system enables businesses to exchange electronic documents in a standardised XML format, eliminating traditional paper invoices and various forms of e-invoices. KSeF features functions for verifying the compliance of KSeF invoices with a specified template, assigning them a unique identification number, and securely archiving them for a decade.

A KSeF invoice – a new, structured standard

An invoice in KSeF is a structured invoice – a document in XML format compliant with the logical structure FA(3) defined by the Ministry of Finance. Every invoice issued in KSeF will be assigned a KSeF number, allocated automatically by the system. Importantly, the identifier assigned by the platform will not replace the invoice number assigned by the issuer, but will function as an additional identification element within the system.

The obligation to use KSeF forms part of the EU’s VAT in the Digital Age (ViDA) initiative, which aims to digitalise and tighten VAT settlements across the European Union. Similar systems are already in operation in Italy, Romania and other Member States, although many are postponing implementation deadlines – Latvia recently deferred its system to January 2028.

How does the National e-Invoice System work? The invoice issuance mechanism

1. Invoice flow in KSeF – from issuance to archiving

The process of issuing and transmitting KSeF invoices differs fundamentally from traditional invoicing. The issuer does not send the document directly to the recipient – an invoice submitted to KSeF goes first to the government platform, where it undergoes validation. The system verifies the compliance of the XML invoice file with the logical template, and upon successful verification assigns a KSeF number and generates an Official Acknowledgement of Receipt (UPO). Only then does the document become an invoice issued in KSeF. KSeF enables automated data processing, streamlining accounting in real time and eliminating the risk of manual errors.

The recipient does not receive the invoice by email or post – they must log in to KSeF or download the document automatically via integrated accounting software. All KSeF invoices are stored in the cloud for 10 years, eliminating the need for in-house archiving and protecting against loss of documents. This is one of the key features of the system that distinguishes KSeF invoices from previous electronic invoicing solutions.

2. How to issue an invoice in KSeF? Available options

Businesses can issue KSeF invoices in two primary ways. The first is to use the free KSeF Taxpayer Application (version 2.0, available from February 2026), which allows invoices to be issued directly in the system without additional tools. The second option involves purchasing and using accounting software integrated with KSeF via the KSeF API 2.0, enabling bulk submission of KSeF invoices directly from the company’s own system.

E-invoices in KSeF may be issued in interactive mode (individual documents) or batch mode (bulk issuance and submission of invoices). In the event of a KSeF failure on the taxpayer’s side – for example due to loss of internet access – an emergency offline24 mode is available, which allows invoices to be issued outside the system with subsequent submission to KSeF by the next business day. In the event of a failure on the tax administration’s side, the issuer may submit documents within a specified period (1 or 7 days) after the system is restored, without any legal consequences.

3. Authentication – the key to KSeF access

Access to KSeF requires one of the following authentication methods: a Trusted Profile or qualified electronic signature (for sole traders), a qualified electronic seal (for companies), a KSeF token (valid only until the end of 2026) or a KSeF certificate. Tokens and certificates are dedicated methods for automation – connecting existing IT systems to KSeF. Companies that do not use an electronic seal need to register a representative via form ZAW-FA in order to grant specific individuals authorisation to issue invoices in KSeF. This is particularly important for accounting firms that need to use KSeF on behalf of multiple clients simultaneously.

When does KSeF come into force? Mandatory system timeline

Mandatory KSeF will be introduced in stages under the Act signed by the President on 27 August 2025. In December 2025, the Ministry of Finance unequivocally confirmed that there are no plans to defer the deadlines – KSeF invoices will apply from 1 February 2026 for companies whose turnover in 2024 exceeded PLN 200 million, with all remaining businesses subject to the obligation to issue invoices in KSeF from 1 April 2026. Micro-entrepreneurs may issue invoices outside KSeF until the end of 2026, provided their total monthly sales do not exceed PLN 10,000 gross. Penalties and the full obligation to use KSeF invoices without exception will apply from 1 January 2027.

Transitional period – reliefs until the end of 2026

The legislator has provided a number of facilitations during the initial period. Businesses may continue to issue traditional paper invoices from fiscal registers up to PLN 450 with the purchaser’s NIP. Until the end of December 2026, no penalties will be imposed for errors in KSeF invoicing, allowing time to learn and adapt procedures. Importantly, from 1 February 2026, all businesses – regardless of when they themselves begin issuing KSeF invoices – will be required to receive documents from counterparties already using the system. This is a frequently overlooked aspect of the KSeF implementation that requires companies to prepare by February, even if their own obligation to issue invoices does not apply until April.

Who is subject to the obligation to issue invoices in KSeF?

KSeF applies to virtually all taxpayers conducting business in Poland. The obligation to use KSeF covers active VAT taxpayers in B2B transactions, VAT-exempt taxpayers (who issue invoices), companies of all legal forms, sole traders, and local government units. The KSeF system also covers certain foreign entrepreneurs with a fixed place of business in Poland, where sales are made through that place of business.

KSeF invoices for consumers – individuals not conducting business activity – remain voluntary. The issuer may decide whether to issue a B2C invoice in KSeF or in the traditional manner. Where an invoice is issued in KSeF, however, the business must agree with the consumer on the method of delivering the invoice. Issuance outside KSeF also applies to certain specific documents, such as single-journey tickets and motorway toll invoices. Flat-rate farmers may use the system only after submitting an appropriate declaration in KSeF. If a Polish taxpayer issues an invoice to a foreign counterparty without a Polish NIP, they must issue it in KSeF but additionally provide the purchaser with a visual representation outside the system – most commonly as a PDF with a QR code enabling verification of the document’s authenticity.

Benefits of KSeF implementation for businesses

Despite initial concerns about transitioning to the new system, the National e-Invoice System brings measurable benefits. Automation of document circulation means that KSeF invoices reach the recipient almost immediately after approval by the system. Free archiving eliminates the cost of in-house document storage – KSeF has a built-in cloud storing invoices for a decade. Businesses using KSeF can expect faster VAT refunds – reduced from 60 to 40 days for taxpayers using the system. Every invoice is assigned a KSeF number and permanently registered, eliminating the risk of loss or destruction of the document. The UPO confirms acceptance of the document by the Ministry of Finance, providing certainty of delivery. The system also increases trust in B2B relationships through real-time verifiability of every KSeF invoice, and limits the possibilities for tax fraud through central registration of all transactions.

How to prepare your company for KSeF in terms of payments and invoicing?

Preparing for the system requires a considered strategy. The first step is to check whether the company is subject to the obligation to issue KSeF invoices from 1 February or April 2026 – this depends on the level of turnover in 2024. The next step is to choose the authentication method – the most convenient solution for sole traders is the Trusted Profile, while companies should consider obtaining a qualified electronic seal, i.e. a KSeF certificate.

It is essential to verify whether the current accounting software supports integration with KSeF via the KSeF API 2.0. The Ministry of Finance provides a Demo test environment where KSeF invoice issuance can be tested without risk of errors in production. It is worth taking advantage of the free training sessions offered by tax offices as part of the “Wednesdays with KSeF” series – the final sessions are taking place in December 2025. The accounting team or external accounting firm must be trained in KSeF invoicing and emergency procedures. Arrangements should be made with counterparties regarding the method of providing KSeF invoice visualisations, particularly where these are foreign entities requiring documents outside the system. It is also worth preparing emergency procedures in case of failure – downloading certificates for offline24 mode in advance and ensuring that key employees know how to issue a KSeF invoice in atypical situations.

Summary – KSeF and the future of Polish business

The National e-Invoice System is the inevitable future of Polish business. KSeF invoices will be rolled out in stages within the next two months, which is why it is worth beginning preparations today. Testing in the voluntary version will help avoid problems when mandatory KSeF becomes a reality in February and April 2026. The Ministry of Finance unequivocally confirms that there are no plans for further deadline deferrals – despite calls from the accounting and business community, implementation of the system is progressing according to the adopted schedule.

Businesses should bear in mind that using KSeF with the appropriate authentication will be necessary not only for issuing but also for receiving invoices from counterparties. The system encompasses far more than simply issuing an invoice – it is a comprehensive change to accounting processes requiring IT system integration and team training in KSeF invoice handling.

Do you need support in preparing your company for the new regulations?

ALTO experts will help you navigate the KSeF implementation safely and answer all questions regarding the practical use of the KSeF invoice system in your organisation. Contact us to ensure a smooth system rollout and avoid problems at this critical moment in the digital transformation of Polish invoicing.

See our other articles in the KSeF series:

• 01. KSeF failure – what happens to the invoice issuance deadline? >>
• 02. Self-invoicing in KSeF. When is an invoice created, how to accept it and how to avoid errors? >>
• 03. Corrective invoices in KSeF – how to do it correctly? >>
• 04. Technical aspects of issuing and marking invoices – QR codes in practice >>
• 05. Delivering invoices within KSeF and outside KSeF – practical issues >>
• 06. What you need to know about the new FA(3) schema? >>
• 07. New obligations in JPK_VAT – a revolution in reporting ahead of KSeF implementation >>
• 08. What to do when a counterparty does not use KSeF? >>
• 09. Who does not have to use KSeF, and when? >>

FAQ – KSeF: frequently asked questions and answers

What are KSeF invoices and will they replace traditional invoices?

KSeF invoices are structured XML documents issued through the National e-Invoice System – a government IT platform managed by the Ministry of Finance. Unlike traditional paper invoices or PDFs, KSeF invoices must be saved in a specific XML format compliant with the FA(3) structure and undergo verification in the system before acquiring legal force. From 1 February 2026 (for companies with turnover above PLN 200 million) and from 1 April 2026 (for other taxpayers), KSeF invoices are set to become the target form of sales documents in B2B transactions. The system provides automatic archiving for 10 years and assigns each document a unique identification number together with an Official Acknowledgement of Receipt (UPO).

What about KSeF invoices for foreign companies?

All KSeF invoices from 1 February or April 2026 must also be issued to foreign counterparties where the transaction is subject to Polish VAT regulations. However, where the purchaser does not have access to the Polish system, the seller is additionally required to provide a visual representation of the invoice with a QR code. From 1 January 2027, there will also be an obligation to include the KSeF number in bank transfers for payments under the split payment mechanism.

Does the recipient HAVE to download the invoice from the system?

No. The obligation to use KSeF applies to issuance, not receipt. The purchaser may deduct VAT even without logging into the system, if they receive a KSeF invoice visualisation in another form from the counterparty. However, automatic downloading of invoices via accounting software integrated with KSeF greatly simplifies bookkeeping and eliminates the risk of lost documents. The KSeF Taxpayer Application 2.0 may be useful for smaller companies that do not have advanced software.

How does the offline24 emergency mode work?

Where a KSeF failure occurs on the taxpayer’s side – for example where the business loses internet access – the offline24 mode may be used. This solution requires the prior downloading of a special KSeF certificate from the system. KSeF invoices issued in this mode must be submitted to the system by the next business day. The system is not, however, intended for extended invoicing outside the platform – it is solely an emergency safeguard.

Does the KSeF system replace JPK_VAT?

No, these are two separate tools. KSeF is not used to settle VAT – it is a platform for issuing and transmitting invoices. Taxpayers will continue to submit JPK_V7 declarations, although in future the functionalities of KSeF may simplify this process through automatic population of data from KSeF invoices registered in the system. The tax administration will, however, have full visibility of transactions thanks to the centralisation of invoicing data.

What are the penalties for failing to implement the system?

Penalties for failure to issue KSeF invoices may amount to 100% of the VAT shown on the invoice, or 18.7% of the total amount due for each document not issued or incorrectly issued. Financial penalties will not, however, apply until 1 January 2027. Until the end of 2026, businesses may issue invoices outside KSeF within the permitted exceptions without any financial consequences – this is a transitional period without penalties, designed to give companies time to implement the system and learn the new procedures.