Proposed amendments to income tax regulations

Last week, a bill amending the PIT and CIT regulations was made available. The bill is to extend the robotisation relief for a further ten tax years, keeping the deduction at 50% of eligible costs, and clarifying the conditions for using this preference. At the same time, it proposes abolishing the Internet relief, while safeguarding acquired rights in specified cases, increasing the deduction cap for blood donation, and repealing the expansion relief in PIT and CIT, which has applied since 2022. The bill is currently out for consultation, with the provisions scheduled to come into force on 1 January 2027.

The Ministry of Finance has launched consultations on a proposal to expand the tax tag dictionary (PD) and add new fields to the RPD node. The changes are intended to allow a more accurate reflection of differences between profit or loss determined under accounting rules and the taxable base for income tax purposes. The proposal also considers the needs of entities preparing financial statements in accordance with IFRS. Opinions - including justifications in the form of editable documents - can be submitted until 15 September 2026 to:Konsultacje_JPK_KR@mf.gov.pl.

Konsultacje podatkowe projektu rozszerzenia słownika znaczników podatkowych (PD) oraz uzupełnienia węzła RPD o nowe pola 

On 24 August 2026, a draft regulation was published setting out new templates for forms PPS‑1, PPD‑1, OPS‑1 and OPD‑1. The forms are to be updated to reflect amendments to the Tax Code that will come into effect on 1 October 2026. The draft regulation provides, among other things, for the possibility of appointing a specific attorney not only by parties to the proceedings, but also by individuals who are not parties yet have been summoned to provide explanations or submit documents. It also removes fields relating to electronic addresses and adds information on the attorney’s profession. The possibility of appointing a substitute attorney will be restricted to advocates, attorneys-at-law, and tax advisers. The draft regulation is currently assessed, and the new provisions are expected to enter into force on 1 October 2026.

Last week, the Head of the National Revenue Administration published a clearance opinion dated 19 June 2026 (ref. DKP2.8082.9.2025) concerning the voluntary redemption, without consideration, of all shares held by the applicant in another company. The planned transaction was intended to result in no CIT or PCC (tax on civil law transactions) liabilities arising. However, it was concluded that securing these tax benefits was not the main, nor one of the main, purposes of the reorganisation. The following objectives were recognised as genuine and economically justified: simplification of the group structure, elimination of an unintended shareholding link, diversification of risk and protection of the company’s liquidity. The Head of the National Revenue Administration also found that the manner of implementation was not artificial and that the tax benefits obtained were not contrary to the purpose of the tax provisions. As a result, the general anti‑avoidance rule will not apply to the described transaction, and a clearance opinion has been issued.

Opinia zabezpieczająca z dnia 19 czerwca 2026 r. (sygn. DKP2.8082.9.2025)

In a judgment dated 27 August 2026 (case file II FSK 1223/23), the Supreme Administrative Court held that the amended provisions of the CIT Act on the so‑called initial adjustment do not apply to taxpayers that began taxation under the lump‑sum on corporate income (Estonian CIT) before 1 January 2022. A company that chose Estonian CIT from the beginning of 2021 must therefore make the adjustment and settle the tax under the rules in force up to the end of 2021. Preparing the adjustment is a one‑off exercise, even though the resulting tax may be settled over time.

In its judgment of 26 August 2026 (case file I FSK 1923/23), the Supreme Administrative Court found that, for continuous licence services, the VAT liability arises at the end of the monthly or quarterly settlement period agreed in the contract. A subsequent sales report from the counterparty, even if necessary to determine the final amount of the fee, does not postpone the tax point. The lack of complete data may affect the calculation of the taxable amount, but not the date on which the VAT liability arises.

In a judgment of 26 August 2026 (case file II FSK 1204/23), the Supreme Administrative Court held that the principal of a loan granted by the taxpayer to an entity related to its shareholder and any interest, fees and other charges connected with financing granted to the taxpayer by a related party constitute hidden profits for the purposes of Estonian CIT. Whether these payments are treated as hidden profits does not depend on the interest rate or other terms being at arm’s length.