All material subject to strictly enforced copyright laws. © 2022 ITR is part of the Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC group.

Poland: Evaluating the tax consolidation for groups regime

Sponsored by sponsored-firms-mddp.png
A broad solution to base erosion is being explored by policy makers

Agnieszka Wnuk of MDDP explains the implications of recent developments concerning the consolidation of tax groups regime in Poland.

Capital groups are allowed to consolidate their corporate tax (CIT) results provided that they fulfil a number of conditions.



Firstly, consolidation for CIT purposes is possible in clear capital structures. A group of at least two companies may be treated as one CIT payer provided that it consists of a Polish parent company holding at least 75% of shares in at least one another Polish company. Thus, in practice, there may be a Polish holding company with several direct subsidiaries (second and further tier subsidiaries results may not be consolidated).



Figure 1 shows a typical consolidated tax group (CTG) structure, including tax transparent partnerships belonging to Polish companies.

Figure 1. A typical CTG structure in Poland




d541c30585bb4f4aa7991f4837a0a114



There is also a minimal capitalisation requirement, and the condition that the companies cannot have tax arrears or benefit from tax exemptions. The CTG must be set for at least three years based on the agreement concluded by the companies and registered by the head of the tax office.



It should be noted that under the Polish CTG regime, the tax results of Polish subsidiaries of a foreign holding company – including an EU parent company – cannot be consolidated. This may be controversial in regard to subsidiaries of holding companies from the EU countries, when taking into account Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) verdicts.



After registration, the CTG must achieve a minimum profitability level of 2% (taxable income to tax revenues). This condition is sometimes perceived as an obstacle by the groups, in particular taking into account that the CTG is tied up for at least three years. In response to the expectations of the business, in 2020, the requirement of minimum profitability was suspended for the groups that faced negative consequences from the COVID-19 pandemic. The suspension is expected to be prolonged to 2021 based on the most recent draft amendments to CIT law.



Moreover, in contrary to the case of breaking other CTG regime requirements – such as the abuse of transfer pricing rules with regard to the transaction concluded with the entity from outside the CTG, or decreasing the number of companies constituting the CTG – failing to achieve the required level of income does not result in severe tax consequences such as the obligation of a retroactive CIT settlement at the level of particular companies. If the CTG fails to report required profitability, the CTG is dissolved at the end of the year in which the condition was broken.



The CTG regime provides for several other advantages apart from the consolidation of the tax regime of member companies.



For instance, the limitation of tax deductibility of debt financing costs (interest, etc.) is not applicable to loans or similar agreements concluded between the members of the CTG.



Likewise, the limitation of tax deductibility of costs of intangible services acquired from related parties is not applicable to the costs of such services bought from other CTG members.



Furthermore, the local transfer pricing documentation file is not required for the transactions concluded between CTG companies.



Taking into account the most recent changes in CIT law, limited partnerships that are tax transparent may become tax opaque (CIT payers) in 2021. A CTG may become an attractive alternative for these groups whose businesses require the conducting of activities through several entities (e.g. the construction industry where particular projects are often held by separate partnerships), allowing for tax consolidation.



Moreover, due to other CIT law changes implemented in recent years, the effective tax rates of numerous groups are constantly increasing. This has happened despite the nominal CIT rate being the same or even decreased in some cases. The level of tax safety has also been brought down by the unclear, low quality legislation and the increasingly aggressive approach of tax authorities during tax audits. Applying an instrument for utilising tax losses generated by another group company on current basis, even though it requires the fulfilment of sometimes restrictive conditions, may seem to be a worthwhile solution.

 

Agnieszka Wnuk

E: agnieszka.wnuk@mddp.pl



More from across our site

This week European Commission officials consider legal loopholes to secure minimum corporate taxation, while Cisco and Microsoft shareholders call for tax transparency.
The fast-food company’s tax settlement with French authorities strengthens the need for businesses to review their TP arrangements and documentation.
The full ALP model will be adopted through a new TP regime, which is set to boost the country’s investments and tax certainty.
Tax professionals have called on the UK government to reconsider its online sales tax as it would affect the economy at the worst time.
Tax professionals have called on companies to act urgently to meet e-invoicing compliance targets as the EU plans to ramp up digitisation.
In the wake of India’s ambitious 25-year plan for economic growth, ITR has partnered with leading tax commentators to discuss what the future will look like for India and for the rest of the world.
But experts cast doubt on HMRC's data and believe COVID-19 would have increased the revenue shortfall.
EY’s plan to separate its auditing and consulting businesses might lessen scrutiny from global regulators, but the brand identity could suffer, say sources.
Multinationals are asking world leaders to put a scale on carbon pricing to tackle climate change at the 48th G7 summit in Germany, from June 26 to 28.
The state secretary told the French press that the country continues to oppose pillar two’s global minimum tax rate following an Ecofin meeting last week.
We use cookies to provide a personalized site experience.
By continuing to use & browse the site you agree to our Privacy Policy.
I agree