International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Poland: Poland widens definition of related parties

Sponsored by

sponsored-firms-mddp.png
sunflower-2881039-1280.jpg

Polish taxpayers will be able to apply new criteria to determine whether parties are related or not for tax purposes from 2019.

Polish taxpayers will be able to apply new criteria to determine whether parties are related or not for tax purposes from 2019. The new definition of "related parties" has been extended to include "significant influence".

The outcome may influence not only the scope of transfer pricing (TP) documentation, but also the tax deductible cost of group charges.

Transfer pricing regulations in Poland have been much stricter than elsewhere in Europe for many years. In most cases in Europe, only capital relations are reviewed while analysing arm's-length prices.

Until the end of 2018, Polish taxpayers were obliged to identify related parties not only based on capital relations (level of direct or indirect shares at 25%, and 5% until the end of 2016), but also in respect to control, management and family relations.

The new, wider definition seeks to include situations where structures are established in capital groups involving an investment fund, for instance, or a foundation or ownership structure specifically modeled on relations.

The idea of exerting "significant influence" is recognised if an individual has the actual ability to influence key business decisions of an entity.

In this respect, relations can also be identified in cases where a person has no formal authority or control in the government of an entity (e.g. at the board of directors or supervisory board level, for instance), and may significantly influence the strategic economic decisions made by the entity.

Examples stated by the legislator include making a decision to abandon a part of a business activity, implementing a new product in the market, taking over a part of a business from a related entity, and influencing the pricing strategy.

Therefore, "significant influence" can be identified in the case of an individual who could have a significant impact on the TP of an entity. The significant impact also exists in the case of family relations (being married, kinship, affinity, or second-degree affinity).

In practice, identifying a relation triggered by "significant influence" could be very challenging, cost-intensive and time-consuming for each organisation, particularly regarding cases featuring many departments.

For example, a number of entities that dispose of employees engaged in making business decisions, or cooperation with subcontractors, or those engaged in negotiations in business agreements, can face a dilemma regarding whether such employees could trigger relations with a subcontractor, for instance.

The new approach employed by tax administrations in new contexts remains to be seen.

In this respect, taxpayers in Poland should pay close attention to fulfilling all TP reporting obligations, and when making tax deductions on a related party's charges.

Transactions exceeding circa €690,000 ($790,000) per year are tax deductible only up to €690,000 + 5% earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amoritisation (EBITDA).

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

ITR’s latest quarterly PDF is going live today, leading on the EU’s BEFIT initiative and wider tax reforms in the bloc.
COVID-19 and an overworked HMRC may have created the ‘perfect storm’ for reduced prosecutions, according to tax professionals.
Participants in the consultation on the UN secretary-general’s report into international tax cooperation are divided – some believe UN-led structures are the way forward, while others want to improve existing ones. Ralph Cunningham reports.
The German government unveils plans to implement pillar two, while EY is reportedly still divided over ‘Project Everest’.
With the M&A market booming, ITR has partnered with correspondents from firms around the globe to provide a guide to the deal structures being employed and tax authorities' responses.
Xing Hu, partner at Hui Ye Law Firm in Shanghai, looks at the implications of the US Uyghur Forced Labor Protection Act for TP comparability analysis of China.
Karl Berlin talks to Josh White about meeting the Fair Tax standard, the changing burden of country-by-country reporting, and how windfall taxes may hit renewable energy.
Sandy Markwick, head of the Tax Director Network (TDN) at Winmark, looks at the challenges of global mobility for tax management.
Taxpayers should look beyond the headline criteria of the simplification regime to ensure that their arrangements meet the arm’s-length standard, say Alejandro Ces and Mark Seddon of the EY New Zealand transfer pricing team.
In a recent webinar hosted by law firms Greenberg Traurig and Clayton Utz, officials at the IRS and ATO outlined their visions for 2023.