ESTONIAN CIT – EFFECTIVE REDUCTION IN CORPORATE TAX IN POLAND

Tax fireworks
Although not yet a tradition, in recent years, it has become customary, to implement revolutionary tax changes as soon as the New Year’s celebratory fireworks have died down. Despite the limitations the pandemic has created, 2020/21 is no different from the last several years.
Most of us are well aware that limited partnerships fall under corporate income tax rules. By the end of the year many have had to deal with this matter in practice and make key business decisions.
In the below article we would like to discuss a solution to this problem. This solution came into force at the same time as the tax on limited partnerships. How does it work and will CIT in Poland really become more ‘Estonian’? Notwithstanding the answer to the latter question, how do you use it? To find out, we encourage you to read further.
‘Estonian’ CIT … what does it mean?
The Ministry of Finance had been working on the new rules for a very long time, nevertheless the legislation was introduced quite hastily at one of the last sessions of Parliament in November (the end of November is the cut-off date for making tax changes for the following year). The flat rate corporate income tax, otherwise known as ‘Estonian’ CIT, is being touted as a means to stimulate investments in Polish small and medium enterprises. Importantly a solution potentially allowing these companies to relieve their tax burden has also been implemented alongside a tax on limited partnerships, the latter of which will mainly impact small and medium enterprises.
The main objective of this solution, long-touted by ministers, is to stimulate investments in small and medium enterprises. The idea was modelled on a solution applied in Estonia, the premise of which is that corporations do not pay income tax until profits are distributed to shareholders. Paying out profits is not an obligation, but rather a right; therefore, until the company exercises its right, it will not have to pay income tax.
As a result, the company will retain more cash on account at the end of the tax year. In other words, cash can be reinvested instead of it being spent on tax. In Estonia, this is the default solution, i.e. each CIT payer falls under those rules.
What about the ‘Polish’ CIT?
As stated above, new regulations modelled on the Estonian rules came into force in Poland with the new year. However, emphasis must be applied on the term ‘modelled’, as it is by no means the same legislation as in Estonia.
The general assumptions are the same: a company should not have to pay income tax until it distributes its profits to its shareholders. However, the solution introduced in Poland is subject to a number of conditions the taxpayer must meet in order to be able to benefit from it.
Firstly, only limited liability companies and public liability companies can benefit from the new legislation, this means that newly taxed limited partnerships will not be able to take advantage of the flat-rate tax system. Furthermore, these taxpayers cannot generate income in excess of PLN 100,000,000 in the prior tax year.
Secondly, at most 50% of their taxable income may come from passive sources. For the purpose of the legislation, the following are to be considered passive income sources: debt; interest on loans and leases; warranties and guaranties; copyrights or industrial property rights; transfer and execution of financial instruments; transactions with affiliated parties (in the absence of or negligible added value in transactions with affiliated parties).
Additionally, a taxpayer who wishes to benefit from a tax deferral must meet the following conditions:
- it must formally employ at least three staff members (employees) who are not also shareholders in the company;
- the total remuneration of those employees must be in excess of at least three times the average salary in the private sector;
- its shareholders must be natural persons (i.e. no other legal entities, including partnerships, foundations and others, and they may not hold shares);
- it may not hold shares, rights, etc. in any other entity (including investment funds, companies, corporations, partnerships);
- it may not prepare financial statements on the basis of IAS;
- it may not be a financial business or a lender;
- it cannot generate income from SEZ;
- it cannot be subject to bankruptcy or liquidation proceedings;
- it may not be formed as a result of a merger, a split, or through the receipt of assets obtained from the liquidation of other companies, or a business or part thereof (not necessarily the so-called structural part of an enterprise, but the assets themselves) the value of which exceeded EUR 10,000;
- it cannot bring in a business or its part (assets) worth in excess of EUR 10,000 to another entity;
- it may not bring in any assets received as a result of the liquidation of another company.
Moreover, in order to benefit from the tax deferral, while meeting all the conditions set out above, it is necessary for the taxpayer to bear the capital expenditure in relation to the past tax year, following which the period of two or four years of use of the flat-rate began:
- capital expenditure higher by 15% but not less than PLN 20,000 over two consecutive tax years;
- capital expenditure of 33% but not less than PLN 50,000 over four consecutive tax years.
In this context capital expenditure is understood as the acquisition of factory new fixed assets or the production of fixed assets and lease payments within the meaning of the Accounting Act (but excluding operating leases).
What comes out of this?
Firstly, and most importantly, it is clear from the legislation that the new regime, although seemingly very beneficial, is not for everyone. Quite the opposite in fact, many taxpayers will not be able to benefit from it, even though they do not fall into the general category of foreign corporations that divert income from Poland abroad without incurring taxes. This is the main difference, which makes the Polish approach markedly different from the Estonian version.
Importantly, this option is taken away not only from taxpayers exceeding the relevant income cap, but also those who exist in any holding company structure (i.e. have shares in other companies or have shareholders – companies). Such practice is common in business, even companies that operate on a relatively small scale often have different entities within their structures, including other companies. More often than not it is a sign of a pragmatic business and a practical need to separate different types of activities. In this situation, a holding company structure will automatically be excluded from these opportunities, even if each company within it would separately meet all the criteria and carry out regular production activities (the only company in such a structure that meets the share requirement is the holding company directly controlled by natural persons), as it will not meet the other criteria.
Additionally, it should be pointed out that the regulations disqualify many a start-up. Very often, start-ups have strategic investors who put capital into starting the business. In this case, investors most often enter the company through a specific investment entity or vehicle, not as natural persons. Although such activities and the creation of the structure are in no way dictated by tax optimisation, the participation of a strategic investor in a start-up is likely to make it impossible for those companies to benefit from the new regulations. Such entities may also ‘fall by the wayside’ of this legislation due to the requirement to increase capital expenditure. It is worth noting that capital expenditure arises when fixed assets are either acquired or produced (and then used in return for consideration). No other type of investment has been included in the legislation. One such example are IT companies. More often than not, investments in this industry do not mean creating or acquiring fixed assets. Equally, it is impossible to deny the huge levels of capital expenditure incurred in this sector. Within this context, the cost of acquiring new technology, know-how or licence which are the most common examples of capital expenditure in the IT industry demonstrates the issue at hand. Unfortunately, this type of capital expenditure will not allow IT companies to benefit economically from the new legislation. It is only an investment in fixed assets, of which IT companies have little, that allows this condition to be fulfilled. Naturally, there is a way to increase fixed asset capital expenditure, even if those are not needed to carry out the taxpayer’s activities, but the business sense of this approach is debatable.
Another business industry, that will be unlikely to take advantage of the new regulations due to its inherent restrictions are developers and other player in this sector. Those companies produce very valuable fixed assets (as well as non-fixed assets) which are then let, leased or sold. Capital expenditure is incurred before any income is made. Therefore, at the point where return on investment is achieved, the investment is no more. Whereas, at the time when the investment is made more often than not there is no income. In summary, those types of companies will not be able to benefit from the new rules, even if their businesses are innovative and include high investment.
There are many example, but only by applying the rules in practice will we find out how large (or small) a group of taxpayers can take advantage of the new regulations. Nevertheless, the deferral of tax ought to be considered, especially in these difficult times. This unlocked cash could be used to increase the competitiveness of a business and speed up its post-crisis recovery. It is worth bearing in mind that the use of preferential arrangement has been curtailed. To that end, the Ministry of Finance has announced it will issue explainers and information on how to adapt market practice in line with the new restrictions. It is worth keeping an eye on this, as is looking into whether the new rules can be applied immediately. If yes, then no doubt they will be very useful for our business.

Blog edited by dr Anna Maria Panasiuk

Founder and Managing Partner of Panasiuk & Partners, with many years of expertise in wealth management.
Authors

dr Maja Czarzasty- Hercberg
OF COUNSEL/ATTORNEY-AT-LAW
Dorota Sajewicz
investment partner
dr Adam Barcikowski
Head of Tax | Certified Tax Advisor
Marta Kwiatkowska - Abramowska
legal assistent
Sylwia Rozwandowicz
ADVOCATE
Sylwia Rybicka
dyrektor ds. rozwoju
Michał Nowacki
radca prawny
Paweł Turek
doradca podatkowy
Katarzyna Zając
aplikant radcowski
Yours Panasiuk
Antoni Goraj
radca prawny
Edyta Winnicka
prawnik
Paweł Szumowski
aplikant radcowski
Yours Panasiuk
Katarzyna Bieńkowska
radca prawny,
doradca podatkowy YOURS Panasiuk
Kamil Kowalik
doradca podatkowy
Monika Baran
radca prawny
Adam Apel
doradca podatkowy
Piotr Świąć
adwokat
Sabina Tyszko
tax consultant
Szczepan Adamski
OF COUNSEL | LAWYER | PRESIDENT OF THE MANAGEMENT BOARD OF YOURS SP. Z O.O.
Magda Kwiatkowska
radca prawny
Andrzej Sałamacha
PARTNER | ATTORNEY-AT-LAW | CERTIFIED INSOLVENCY AND RESTRUCTURING ADVISOR
dr Anna Maria Panasiuk
managing partner | advocate | wealth advisor
Maciej Małachowski
TRAINEE ATTORNEY-AT-LAW
Klaudia Borkowska
Advocate trainee
Archives
-
2023
-
2022
-
December
- POLISH FAMILY FOUNDATION – A new solution for entrepreneurs
- POLSKA FUNDACJA RODZINNA – nowe rozwiązanie dla przedsiębiorców
- INVESTMENT FUNDS IN THE NETHERLANDS – ABC OF SETTING UP OF AIF
- FUNDUSZE INWESTYCYJNE W HOLANDII – ABC ZAŁOŻENIA AFI
- TAX INCENTIVES TO INVEST IN AN ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT FUND (AIF)
- ZACHĘTY PODATKOWE DO INWESTYCJI W ALTERNATYWNĄ SPÓŁKĘ INWESTYCJNĄ (ASI)
-
November
-
October
- CAN AN ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT FUND SERVE THE PURPOSES OF PRIVATE INVESTMENTS?
- CZY ALTERNATYWNA SPÓŁKA INWESTYCYJNA MOŻE SŁUŻYĆ PRYWATNYM INWESTYCJOM?
- M&A – TRANSACTION TRIVIA IN MERGERS & ACQUISITIONS
- M&A – CIEKAWOSTKI TRANSAKCJI MERGERS & ACQUISITION
- HISZPAŃSKA REZYDENCJA PODATKOWA – PUZZLE DLA WTAJEMNICZONYCH!
- Spanish tax residence – jigsaw puzzles for the initiated!
-
September
-
August
-
July
-
May
- PODWÓJNA REZYDENCJA PODATKOWA – 4 PRZYKŁADY POWSTANIA [CZĘŚĆ II OSOBY PRYWATNE]
- DUAL TAX RESIDENCE – 4 EXAMPLES OF ITS EMERGENCE [PART II NATURAL PERSONS]
- INVESTORS’ Q&A ABOUT THE ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT FUNDS
- O CO NAJCZĘŚCIEJ PYTAJĄ INWESTORZY W KONTEKŚCIE ASI (ALTERNATYWNYCH SPÓŁEK INWESTYCYJNYCH)?
- REVOLUTION ON THE MERGERS & ACQUISITIONS MARKET – RECORD-BREAKING M&A TRANSACTIONS IN POLAND
- REWOLUCJA NA RYNKU FUZJI I PRZEJĘĆ – REKORDOWE TRANSAKCJE M&A W POLSCE
- 7 SINS COMMITTED WHILE RUNNING A BUSINESS AND MAKING INVESTMENTS
- 7 GRZECHÓW PRZY PROWADZENIU BIZNESU I INWESTYCJACH
-
April
-
March
-
February
- SIMPLE CONSERVATIVE INVESTMENTS. HISTORICAL ANALYSIS OF THE LAST 20 YEARS
- PROSTE INWESTYCJE KONSERWATYWNE. ANALIZA HISTORYCZNA OSTATNICH 20 LAT
- CZY WARTO ZAMIESZKAĆ W HISZPANII? PRAWO BECKHAMA, CZYLI JAK NIE PŁACIĆ PODATKÓW W HISZPANII
- IS IT WORTH LIVING IN SPAIN? BECKHAM ‘S LAW, HOW TO AVOID PAYING TAXES IN SPAIN
- ESTONIAN CIT 2022 AS A REMEDY FOR THE POLISH DEAL
- ESTOŃSKI CIT 2022 JAKO REMEDIUM NA POLSKI ŁAD
-
January
- HOW CAN YOU SET UP AN ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT FUND IN A FEW WEEKS?
- JAK MOŻNA ZAŁOŻYĆ ALTERNATYWNĄ SPÓŁKĘ INWESTYCYJNĄ W KILKA TYGODNI?
- DO CLOSED-END INVESTMENT FUNDS STILL PAY OFF?
- CZY FUNDUSZE INWESTYCYJNE ZAMKNIĘTE JESZCZE SIĘ OPŁACAJĄ?
- 6 REASONS WHY IT IS WORTH DEVELOPING A BUSINESS OUTSIDE POLISH BORDERS
- 6 POWODÓW, DLA KTÓRYCH WARTO ROZWIJAĆ BIZNES POZA POLSKĄ
-
December
-
2021
-
December
-
November
-
October
- LIFE IN TENERIFE – TAXES AND REAL ESTATE IN THE CANARY ISLANDS
- TENERYFA NA ŻYCIE – PODATKI I NIERUCHOMOŚCI NA WYSPACH KANARYJSKICH
- TURNKEY REORGANISATION – HOW TO PREPARE A BUSINESS FOR INTERNATIONAL EXPANSION
- REORGANIZACJA POD KLUCZ CZYLI JAK PRZYGOTOWAĆ BIZNES NA EKSPANSJĘ ZAGRANICZNĄ
- BUSINESS EXPANSION OUTSIDE THE EU – LET’S HAVE A LOOK AT OTHER CONTINENTS
- EKSPANSJA BIZNESU POZA UE – SPÓJRZMY NA INNE KONTYNENTY
-
September
-
August
- MAJĄTEK RODZINNY
- COMPANY RELOCATION WITHIN THE EU: PROCESS ANALYSIS AND CASE STUDY
- PRZENIESIENIE SPÓŁKI W OBRĘBIE UE: ANALIZA PROCESU I CASE STUDY
- SCALING UP BUSINESS. TAXES IN ESTONIA, ITALY, UNITED KINGDOM, MALTA AND CYPRUS – COMPARISON
- EKSPANSJA BIZNESU. PODATKI W EUROPIE.
- POLSKI ŁAD OCZAMI PRZEDSIĘBIORCY
-
July
- EXPANDING NEXT DOOR – THE CZECH REPUBLIC, SLOVAKIA, GERMANY, ROMANIA
- EKSPANSJA PO SĄSIEDZKU – CZECHY, SŁOWACJA, NIEMIECY, RUMUNIA
- CONVERTIBLE DEBT IN POLAND
- CONVERTIBLE DEBT PRZY INWESTYCJACH PRE-SEED
- AIFs (ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT FUNDS) LEAD THE WAY ON THE POLISH CAPITAL MARKET
- ASI WIEDZIE PRYM NA POLSKIM RYNKU KAPITAŁOWYM
- FAMILY FOUNDATIONS IN POLAND. CONCEPT VERSUS ENTREPRENEURS’ EXPECTATIONS
- FUNDACJA RODZINNA W POLSCE. ISTOTA POMYSŁU A OCZEKIWANIA PRZEDSIĘBIORCÓW
-
June
- CORPORATE TAX RELIEF AND INCENTIVES FOR INVESTORS – NEW (BETTER?) SOLUTIONS
- ULGI PODATKOWE I ZACHĘTY DLA INWESTORÓW – IDZIE NOWE (LEPSZE?)
- 9% CIT ZAMIAST 19%, JAK PŁACIĆ NIŻSZY PODATEK
- CYPRUS VS. UNITED ARAB EMIRATES, WHERE TO MOVE? CHANGE OF TAX RESIDENCE
- CYPR VS. ZJEDNOCZONE EMIRATY ARABSKIE, GDZIE SIĘ WYPROWADZIĆ? ZMIANA REZYDENCJI PODATKOWEJ
-
May
-
April
-
March
-
February
-
January
- 6 MAJOR CHANGES IN THE BEHAVIOUR OF PRIVATE INVESTORS AND THEIR PORTFOLIOS IN 2020
- 6 GŁÓWNYCH ZMIAN W ZACHOWANIACH I PORTFELACH INWESTORÓW PRYWATNYCH W ROKU 2020
- TAX SIMPLIFICATION 2021 IN POLAND – A MAGNET FOR FOREIGN INVESTORS
- UPROSZCZENIA PODATKOWE 2021 W POLSCE – MAGNESEM DLA INWESTORÓW ZAGRANICZNYCH
- ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT FUND (AIF) – A FIRST-CLASS INVESTMENT VEHICLE AT YOUR FINGERTIPS
- ALTERNATYWNA SPÓŁKA INWESTYCYJNA (ASI). PIERWSZORZĘDNY WEHIKUŁ INWESTYCYJNY NA WYCIĄGNIĘCIE RĘKI
- ESTONIAN CIT – EFFECTIVE REDUCTION IN CORPORATE TAX IN POLAND
- CIT ESTOŃSKI – EFEKTYWNE OBNIŻENIE OPODATKOWANIA SPÓŁEK W POLSCE
-
December
-
2020
-
December
-
November
- WE BREAK STEREOTYPES! PRECONCEPTIONS ABOUT LAWYERS AND THE REALITY OF BUSINESS
- AM I REALLY SAVING MYSELF MONEY? TODAY I WILL SAVE 100 PLN TO LOSE 1000 PLN TOMORROW
- ŁAMIEMY STEREOTYPY! CZYLI PRZEKONANIA O PRAWNIKACH, A REALIA BIZNESU
- CZY TO NAPRAWDĘ OSZCZĘDNOŚĆ? DZIŚ „ZAOSZCZĘDZĘ” 100 ZŁ ŻEBY JUTRO STRACIĆ 1000 ZŁ
- ZAPRASZAMY do MONAKO
- WHY IS IT WORTH BECOMING A TAX RESIDENT OF MONACO?
- DLACZEGO WARTO ZOSTAĆ REZYDENTEM MONAKO? PODATKI W MONAKO
-
October
-
September
-
August
-
June
- THE WORLD IS CHANGING, AND YOU ARE STILL LOOKING FOR A UNICORN? In this article, we tell you everything you need to know to find one
- ŚWIAT SIĘ ZMIENIA, A TY WCIĄŻ SZUKASZ JEDNOROŻCA. Wszystko co musisz wiedzieć aby go znaleźć napisaliśmy tutaj
- KRYZYSOWE INWESTYCJE, CZYLI: ODWAŻNA INWESTYCJA WYMAGA OSTROŻNEGO PLANOWANIA
- JAK TRWOGA TO DO PRAWNIKA – NIEPOKOJĄCE TENDENCJE WŚRÓD STARTUPÓW
-
May
-
April
- AMERICAN TAX COMPETITION. HELPFUL OR “HARMFUL”
- KONKURENCJA PODATKOWA PO AMERYKAŃSKU. POŻĄDANA, CZY „SZKODLIWA”
- PIENIĄDZE TO NIE WSZYSTKO. Czyli jak inwestować, żeby nie stracić
- INVESTING IN HARD TIMES: HOW TO SET UP YOUR BUSINESS IN NEW YORK
- APETYT NA INWESTYCJE W TRUDNYCH CZASACH. SPÓŁKA W NOWYM YORKU
- WPŁYW PANDEMII NA TRANSAKCJE FUZJI I PRZEJĘĆ
- IMPACT OF A PANDEMIC ON MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS
- PODATKI NA TRUDNE CZASY
-
March
-
February
-
December
-
2019
-
2018
-
2017
-
2016
-
2015
-
December
-
November
- Zwrot PCC od czynności restrukturyzacyjnych z udziałem spółek komandytowo-akcyjnych
- Zmiany podatkowe na Cyprze zachętą dla potencjalnych inwestorów
- Cypryjskie fundusze inwestycyjne mogą korzystać ze zwolnienia podatkowego w Polsce
- Nowe sankcje za niezłożenie sprawozdania finansowego
- Europejskie poświadczenie dziedziczenia
-
October
-
July
-
December
Categories
- Alternative Investment Fund (15)
- Expansion (12)
- Investments (34)
- Jurisdictions (11)
- Law (13)
- M&A (11)
- POLISH FAMILY FOUNDATION (1)
- Polish Holding Company (2)
- Relocation (9)
- Reorganisation (6)
- Succession (8)
- Tax (28)
- Tax accounting (2)
- Tax Preferences (2)
- Tax Residence (10)
- Wealth Advisory (8)

New publications
You want to be up to date, enter your e-mail address and you will receive new publications straight to your inbox: