Poland: Poland widens definition of related parties

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: 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 & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

As the firm embarks on a major shakeup of its EMEA partnerships, some staff will be watching nervously
The buyout of Hucke and Associates continues Ryan’s streak of firm acquisitions; in other news, a UK appeal against VAT on private school fees was dismissed
Tax teams are responding to usual client demand in the region, albeit with increased working from home flexibility, local sources indicate
A 120-plus-day delay to refunds would cost taxpayers almost $3bn in additional interest, the Cato Institute warned; plus indirect tax updates from February
The Office for Budget Responsibility’s pessimistic pillar two forecast accompanied the UK chancellor’s muted Spring Statement, dubbed ‘as dull as possible’ by one adviser
Digital tax reform is dissolving the old ‘temporal buffer’, forcing systems, institutions, and professionals to adapt as real-time reporting reshapes governance, capability, and compliance
Our first instalment features analysis of Deloitte’s landmark EMEA merger, Donald Trump’s Supreme Court tariff showdown and Venezuela’s tax evolution
While some believe it could have a positive effect on the wider advisory landscape, others argue that HMRC’s ‘red tape’ exercise won’t deter bad actors
The political optics of the US’s carve-out deal are poor, but as the Fair Tax Foundation’s Paul Monaghan writes, it preserves pillar two’s guiding ethos
The big four firm reportedly sent ‘threatening’ correspondence to Unity Advisory over its hiring of ex-PwC partners; plus tax recruitment news from the week
Gift this article