Poland: Reverse-charge on domestic construction services

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Poland: Reverse-charge on domestic construction services

fornalik.jpg

Janina Fornalik

The amendments to the Polish VAT Act, binding since January 1 2017, introduced new regulations regarding the reverse charge mechanism applicable to domestic supplies between two VAT payers consisting of construction works. However, additional specific conditions should be met, which in practice create a number of interpretation problems.

The legislator introduced two main conditions for the application of the reverse charge mechanism, which must be fulfilled jointly:

1) Subjective condition – the reverse charge mechanism should be applied only on the construction works listed in Annex 14 to the VAT Act; and

2) Objective condition – regarding the status of the parties to the transaction, i.e.:

  • the service provider is not exempt from VAT;

  • the service recipient should be registered as an active VAT payer; and

  • the service provider should act as a subcontractor.

In regards to the subjective condition, it is not always clear if the scope of activities covered by the contract should be classified as the construction works mentioned in Annex 14 to the VAT Act. VAT treatment of the composite supplies could be one of the controversial issues (separate supplies vs. one single supply and determining the main supply).

In regards to the objective condition, the meaning of the term "subcontractor" is problematic in view of various practical situations, since it is not defined in the VAT Act, nor can it be found in any other tax regulations. The Ministry of Finance stated that the literary interpretation of this word should be understood from the dictionary definition, i.e. "subcontractor" should be considered to a person or a firm that performs works commissioned by the main contractor. It should be, therefore, assumed that if the service provider acts as a main contractor directly for the benefit of the investor (for whom the construction permit was issued), it should not be considered as a subcontractor and the reverse charge mechanism will be not applicable. The problem arises e.g. where the construction works are rendered by the members of the consortium or where they are recharged to another entity.

Application of the appropriate VAT rules to the construction services performed since January 1 2017 is very important. The services provider who performs construction works acting as a subcontractor is obliged to issue VAT invoices without VAT. This is the service recipient who should account for VAT under the reverse-charge mechanism. Then, the main contractor should issue an invoice to the investor on the general rules charging output VAT. This means that the subcontractor will be in the permanent VAT refund position which significantly influences the cash flow.

Incorrect settlement of the VAT on the construction works might have substantial VAT consequences. If the subcontractor issues the invoice to the main contractor with VAT, the main contractor will not be entitled to deduct input VAT from such an invoice. On the other hand, the main contractor will be obliged to settle output VAT on the construction services acquired under reverse charge rules. Thus, the main contractor will have to pay VAT twice. In case the main contractor fails to account for output VAT, the penalties for the breach of this obligation will be imposed, including 30% sanction.

Janina Fornalik (janina.fornalik@mddp.pl)

MDDP, Warsaw

Tel: +48 22 3226888

Website: www.mddp.pl

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The controversial deal will allow US-parented groups to be carved out from key aspects of pillar two
Awards
ITR invites tax firms, in-house teams, and tax professionals to make submissions for the 2027 World Tax rankings and the 2026 ITR Tax Awards globally
Pillar two was ‘weakened’ when it altered from a multinational convention agreement to simply national domestic law, Federico Bertocchi also argued
Imposing the tax on virtual assets is a measure that appears to have no legal, economic or statistical basis, one expert told ITR
The EU has seemingly capitulated to the US’s ‘side-by-side’ demands. This may be a win for the US, but the uncertainty has only just begun for pillar two
The £7.4m buyout marks MHA’s latest acquisition since listing on the London Stock Exchange earlier this year
ITR’s most prolific stories of the year charted public pillar two spats, the continued fallout from the PwC Australia tax leaks scandal, and a headline tax fraud trial
The climbdowns pave the way for a side-by-side deal to be concluded this week, as per the US Treasury secretary’s expectation; in other news, Taft added a 10-partner tax team
A vote to be held in 2026 could create Hogan Lovells Cadwalader, a $3.6bn giant with 3,100 lawyers across the Americas, EMEA and Asia Pacific
Foreign companies operating in Libya face source-based taxation even without a local presence. Multinationals must understand compliance obligations, withholding risks, and treaty relief to avoid costly surprises
Gift this article