1. A. Transfer pricing documentation requirements
    1. Are taxpayers obliged to maintain transfer pricing documentation? Does this obligation apply to all taxpayers, or only to certain categories (e.g. taxpayers with turnover or assets exceeding a particular threshold)? 
    2.   What is the content of the documentation that must be prepared?
    3. Which transactions must be documented – all transactions with associated enterprises, or only those which exceed a particular threshold?     
    4. What is the definition of “associated enterprises” for the purposes of this requirement – in particular, are transactions between a PE and its head office in the scope of the documentation requirement?         
    5. For EU countries, is the content of the documentation similar to that described in the EU Code of Conduct on TP documentation for associated enterprises (“EU TPD”)? If not, are taxpayers entitled to choose between the local requirements and the EU TPD?
    6. For all countries (and, in particular, OECD countries), is the content of the documentation similar to that described in the revisions to Chapter V of the OECD TP Guidelines (final report on Action 13 of the BEPS project)? If not, are taxpayers entitled to choose between the local requirements and the OECD approach?
    7. Do taxpayers which are not established in your jurisdiction need to undertake to provide any specific information upon request? Can your tax authorities require a taxpayer in your jurisdiction to provide information which is located in another state?
    8. If comparable studies are to be provided, do the tax authorities generally accept regional benchmark studies (e.g. pan-European benchmark studies)?           
    9. If comparable studies are to be provided in general, are safe harbours/specific circumstances exempting taxpayers from preparing benchmark studies (such as the EU Joint Transfer Pricing Forum guidelines on low value-adding services or revisions to Chapter VII of the OECD TP Guidelines about low value-adding intragroup services) in your jurisdiction, or are there situations in which tax authorities do not request benchmark studies? If so, in which circumstances taxpayers are exempted from benchmark studies?           
    10. What language(s) is to be used by taxpayers in submitting TP documentation?  
    11. What is the deadline or timescale for providing TP documentation to the tax authorities - is it to be provided, for example, upon filing of the tax returns, at the beginning of a tax audit or on the specific request of the tax authorities?
    12.  In the event that the documentation is not provided within the applicable timescale or is incomplete, do documentation-related penalties apply? If so, please detail the penalties and the circumstances in which they do and do not apply.
    13.  Does the absence or incompleteness of documentation reverse the burden of proof as regards the arm’s length character of the transactions?
    14. In the event that the tax authorities (i) impose documentation-related penalties and (ii) make a transfer pricing reassessment, does the imposition of documentation- related penalties prevent the taxpayer from initiating any mutual agreement procedure which may be contained in an applicable tax treaty (or, for EU countries, the procedure contained in the EU Arbitration Convention) with a view to eliminating any double taxation resulting from the transfer pricing reassessment?  
    15.  Any other relevant aspect not addressed above?    
  2. B. Country-by-Country reporting ("CbCR")
    1. Has the obligation to file a CbCR been implemented? If not, is the introduction of the CbCR being considered, and if so, when?
    2.  If the obligation to file a CbCR is in force, what is the tax year from which this obligation applies and what is the deadline for filing the CbCR? 
    3.  Which taxpayers are required to file a CbCR under the applicable laws?
    4. Is the content of the CbCR fully in line with the OECD model (final report on Action 13 of the BEPS project)? If not, what are the differences?
    5.  What is the penalty for failing to file the CbCR on time? Can local subsidiaries of a foreign group suffer the local penalty if the foreign group has not filed the CbCR?
    6.  Are there tax treaties in force allowing the communication of CbCR with other jurisdictions?
    7. Any other relevant aspect not addressed above?
  3. C. As the case may be, other documentation / filing requirement in relation to transfer pricing?
    1. Are there any other documentation/filing requirements in relation to TP?
    2.  If so, what is the content of such documentation / filing requirement? What language(s) are to be used by taxpayers?    
    3.  What is the deadline for meeting this documentation / filing requirement?
    4.  Does this obligation apply to all taxpayers, or only to certain categories (e.g. taxpayers with turnover or assets exceeding a particular threshold)?
    5. What is the penalty for failing to meet this requirement on time?
    6. Any other relevant aspect not addressed above?   

jurisdiction

Poland
Add jurisdiction

A. Transfer pricing documentation requirements

1. Are taxpayers obliged to maintain transfer pricing documentation? Does this obligation apply to all taxpayers, or only to certain categories (e.g. taxpayers with turnover or assets exceeding a particular threshold)? 

Poland adopted the OECD three-tiered approach to TP documentation (with some local specifics), i.e.:

Local File

The obligation to prepare a Local File is imposed on taxpayers (natural persons, legal persons, organisational units without legal personality and permanent establishments or “PEs”) engaged in controlled transactions:

  • with its associated enterprises (according to the definition provided in the Polish tax law), or
  • with entities based in a country applying harmful tax competition, i.e. a “tax haven” (the list of such countries is included in the Decree issued by the Polish Finance Minister), and

which exceed the thresholds specified in Q2a below.

Master File

Taxpayers are required to possess the Master File if the following criteria are met:

  • the taxpayer is obliged to prepare the Local File
  • the group prepares a consolidated financial statement
  • the consolidated revenues of the taxpayer’s capital group exceeded PLN 200 million (approximately EUR 47 million) in the previous fiscal year.

Country-by-Country Reporting (“CbCR”)

Members of capital groups with consolidated revenues exceeding EUR 750 million or (in case consolidated revenues are presented in zloty), PLN 3,250 million are, under certain circumstances, obliged to submit CbCR to the Polish tax authorities or to notify them about the country where it is filed.

Additional reporting obligations

Taxpayers obliged to prepare the Local File are also required to provide the Polish tax authorities with information on TP (form TPR-C). See Section C.

2.  What is the content of the documentation that must be prepared?

In general, Polish TP documentation is in line with Chapter V of the OECD Guidelines. However, some local specifics need to be included for the Local File and Master File. 

In general, the Local File should include (presented separately for each transaction):

  • description of the related parties engaged in the controlled transactions
  • description of the controlled transactions, including the functional analysis
  • TP analysis under which the taxpayer (depending on the circumstances) is obliged to prepare a benchmarking study or otherwise justify the arm’s length nature of the transaction
  • financial data.

In case of the Master File, it should include the following information:

  • description of the group
  • description of the material intangible assets owned by the group
  • description of the material financial transactions carried out by the group
  • financial and tax information concerning the group.

In case of controlled transactions concluded by related entities which are micro-entrepreneurs or small entrepreneurs (assuming that transactions are not concluded with entities having their residence, seat or management in a territory recognised as a tax haven), a Local File may not include a benchmarking analysis.

The specific scopes of Local Files and Master Files are presented in the ordinance issued by the Polish Ministry of Finance.

2.1 Which transactions must be documented – all transactions with associated enterprises, or only those which exceed a particular threshold?     

The Local File, together with a TP analysis, should be prepared for each controlled transaction exceeding:

  • PLN 10 million (approximately EUR 2.4 million) for commodity or financial transactions
  • PLN 2 million (approximately EUR 500,000) for service transactions and transactions other than those mentioned above. 

In the case of controlled transactions conducted with entities based in a tax haven, the threshold for preparation of a Local File is:

  • PLN 2.5 million (approximately EUR 590,000) for financial transactions
  • PLN 0.5 million (approximately EUR 120,000) for transactions other than those mentioned above. 

The Polish regulations also indicate a number of cases where the taxpayer is exempted from the obligation to prepare a Local File. The major ones include the following:

  • conclusion of a transaction between Polish enterprises (only) that did not demonstrate a tax loss for the documented period and did not take advantage of selected tax exemptions (e.g. in connection with carrying out their operations within a Special Economic Zone or “SEZ”)
  • conclusion of a transaction subject to an Advance Pricing Agreement (“APA”)
  • conclusion of a transaction between companies from a tax capital group
  • determination of the TP in an unlimited tender procedure based on public procurement law
  • transactions subject to safe harbours (once statutory conditions have been fulfilled)
  • reinvoicing transactions (once statutory conditions have been fulfilled)
  • transactions involving solely the settlement between related entities of expenses incurred for the benefit of an unrelated entity (once statutory conditions have been fulfilled).

It should be noted that the Polish TP regulations define a “controlled transaction” as “activities of a business nature that may be identified on the basis of the parties’ actual conduct, including attribution of profits to a foreign PE, the terms of which have been established or imposed as a result of connections”.

Thus, the concept of a controlled transaction covers all economic activities including commercial, capital, financial and service activities.

2.2 What is the definition of “associated enterprises” for the purposes of this requirement – in particular, are transactions between a PE and its head office in the scope of the documentation requirement?         

Under Polish TP regulations, associated enterprises are:

  • entities exercising a “significant influence” on at least one other entity, defined as:
    • holding, directly or indirectly, at least 25% of the: (i) share capital, or (ii) voting rights in the supervisory, decision-making or managing body, or (iii) shares in or rights to participate in the profits, losses or the property or their expectative, including participation units and investment certificates, or
    • the actual ability of a natural person to influence key economic decisions taken by a legal person or an organisational unit without legal personality, or
    • being the spouse or relative by consanguinity or by affinity up to the second degree, or
  • entities subject to significant influence of another entity/entities (as indicated above)
  • a company that is not a legal person and its partner 
  • a limited partnership and a limited joint-stock partnership, having its registered office or central administration in the territory of the Republic of Poland, and its general partner
  • a general partnership having its seat or management in the territory of the Republic of Poland, if the partners of the general partnership are not exclusively natural persons and the general partnership does not submit information on the rights to profit participation of the partnership as required and its partner
  • a head office and its PE.

In addition, the Polish tax authorities may determine that there are relations between entities in terms of TP if they identify relationships that have not been established for justified economic reasons, in particular those aimed at manipulating the ownership structure. This regulation is aimed at taking into account specific ownership structures in various tax jurisdictions, which change rapidly over time.

As a result, the definition of associated enterprises will be fulfilled by, for example, foundations, trusts, or investment funds.

2.3 For EU countries, is the content of the documentation similar to that described in the EU Code of Conduct on TP documentation for associated enterprises (“EU TPD”)? If not, are taxpayers entitled to choose between the local requirements and the EU TPD?

Content of the Local File and Master File is, in general, in line with Chapter V of the OECD Guidelines (however, some local specifics need to be included). Thus, content of the Local File and Master File is also broadly in line with the EU TP documentation requirements for country-specific documentation.

Nevertheless in Poland taxpayers are obliged to present TP documentation in accordance with Polish rules and content requirements.

2.4 For all countries (and, in particular, OECD countries), is the content of the documentation similar to that described in the revisions to Chapter V of the OECD TP Guidelines (final report on Action 13 of the BEPS project)? If not, are taxpayers entitled to choose between the local requirements and the OECD approach?

See Q2c.

2.5 Do taxpayers which are not established in your jurisdiction need to undertake to provide any specific information upon request? Can your tax authorities require a taxpayer in your jurisdiction to provide information which is located in another state?

From the Polish TP perspective, an entity that is neither established/a tax resident in Poland, nor subject to limited tax obligations in Poland (i.e. a PE), but is only party to a controlled transaction with an “associated enterprise” that is subject to documentation requirements, is not required to present documents/specific information to the Polish tax authorities.

Foreign taxpayers having a PE in Poland are required to prepare TP documentation and fulfil the reporting obligations according to the criteria set out under Q1 above.

In the case of a tax audit, the Polish tax authorities may require information/data in the possession of an entity located in another state only if they concern the controlled transaction under review.

2.6 If comparable studies are to be provided, do the tax authorities generally accept regional benchmark studies (e.g. pan-European benchmark studies)?           

The Polish tax authorities generally accept regional benchmarking studies, in particular pan-European ones (assuming that the comparability criteria are met). We note, however, that the Polish tax authorities have a strong preference to see local comparables (if available), in particular in the case that the benchmarking study is for a Polish entity only.

2.7 If comparable studies are to be provided in general, are safe harbours/specific circumstances exempting taxpayers from preparing benchmark studies (such as the EU Joint Transfer Pricing Forum guidelines on low value-adding services or revisions to Chapter VII of the OECD TP Guidelines about low value-adding intragroup services) in your jurisdiction, or are there situations in which tax authorities do not request benchmark studies? If so, in which circumstances taxpayers are exempted from benchmark studies?           

Poland introduced safe harbour regulations in respect of low value-adding services and financial transactions (loans, bonds).

In both cases, if certain conditions are met, the Polish tax authorities do not verify the arm’s length nature of the remuneration agreed in transactions between associated enterprises, and recognise the methodology adopted by the taxpayer as correct. Furthermore, a Local File does not have to be prepared with respect to such transactions.

Low value-adding services

To qualify for safe harbour, low value-adding services must meet the conditions specified in the Polish transfer pricing regulations, i.e.:

  • mark-up on costs is not higher than 5%, in the case that the taxpayer purchases the services
  • mark-up on costs is not lower than 5%, in the case that the taxpayer renders the services
  • the service provider is not located in a country recognised by Polish law as a tax haven
  • the service recipient possesses information on:
    • the type and amount of costs included in the calculation of the remuneration
    • the costs allocation keys applied in the transaction (together with their justification)
    • description of the transaction, including analysis of functions, risks and assets.

Furthermore, the definition of low value-adding services provided in Polish tax law differs from the one indicated in the OECD Guidelines. In particular, the Polish TP regulations provide a limited catalogue of services that might be recognised as low value-adding services in Poland.

Financial transactions (loans, bonds)

As regards loans and bonds, the safe harbour regulations might be applied if:

  • the interest rate of the loan/bond is based on the base interest rate and margin published by the Polish Minister of Finance
  • there are no additional fees related to the loan/bond handling
  • the loans/bonds are granted for no more than 5 years
  • the total amount of granted/obtained loans/bonds does not exceed PLN 20 million (approximately EUR 4.6 million)
  • the lender is not located in a country recognised by Polish law as a tax haven.

The base interest rate and margin level are published by the Polish Minister of Finance at least once a year.

2.8 What language(s) is to be used by taxpayers in submitting TP documentation?  

In Poland, only the Master File can be submitted to the Polish tax authorities in English. However, in the case of a request from the tax authorities, the taxpayer is obliged to provide them with a Polish version of the Master File within 30 days.

The Local File must be provided in Polish.

3. What is the deadline or timescale for providing TP documentation to the tax authorities - is it to be provided, for example, upon filing of the tax returns, at the beginning of a tax audit or on the specific request of the tax authorities?

The statutory deadlines for fulfilling TP documentation obligations are:

  • Local File – 10 months after the end of a fiscal year
  • Master File – 12 months after the end of a fiscal year.

In addition, the taxpayer has 14 days from receipt of a formal request to submit TP documentation to the Polish tax authorities.

In accordance with the Tax Ordinance, the sanction for using non-arm’s length pricing in transactions with associated enterprises may vary from 10% to 30% of the amount of overstated loss or understated income, depending on the circumstances.

Regardless of the above, in the case that the TP documentation is not submitted within the statutory deadline, is incomplete or contains false information, certain sanctions might be imposed on individuals based on the Fiscal Penal Code (“FPC”).

Under the FPC, penalties/sanctions might be imposed on individuals who conduct the company’s business affairs (in particular its financial affairs). In practice, this would be:

  • the Management Board members of the company
  • persons accountable for the company’s tax settlements, i.e. financial director, chief accountant, the person who signs the tax returns.

According to the FPC, sanctions/penalties might be imposed only in the case of intentional action by an individual. Therefore in practice, penalties are generally imposed on persons to whom the offence might be assigned – typically, those indicated by the company. The following sanctions might be imposed on individuals in the case of TP issues:

  • a fine of up to 120 daily rates – in the case that the tax authorities treat the TP documentation as tax information in the meaning of the FPC, failing to submit complete documentation within the statutory deadline might result in imposing on the individuals employed in the company a fine of up to 120 daily rates (e.g. the amount of the fine in 2024 might range between approximately EUR 335-4,050 or PLN 1,430-17,320)
  • a fine of up to 720 daily rates or imprisonment for up to 5 years (or both penalties at the same time) – these sanctions might be imposed on taxpayers who intentionally report tax in an amount lower than the amount due. Therefore, in the case that the Polish tax authorities claim that the company intentionally reported tax in an amount lower than that due, they may try to impose fiscal penal sanctions on individuals employed in the company (for 2024, the maximum amount of the fine would amount to approximately EUR 9.7 million or PLN 41.3 million).

For any violation in the area of TP, the general provisions indicated in the FPC might also apply.

In addition, as from 2019, the FPC provides sanctions for failing to meet the requirements on additional reporting in the area of TP (see section C/Q5).

5. Does the absence or incompleteness of documentation reverse the burden of proof as regards the arm’s length character of the transactions?

There is no official reversal of the burden of the proof, which lies with the tax authorities.

No.

7. Any other relevant aspect not addressed above?    

Advance Pricing Agreement (“APA”) procedure

APAs are available in Poland, including for foreign business entities operating through a PE.

The Head of National Revenue Administration in Poland may issue, on request, a decision on whether it finds a given method of determining the TP between related parties acceptable.

The Polish Tax Ordinance allows for the following types of APAs:

  • unilateral APA – for transactions between domestic entities or a domestic entity and a foreign entity
  • bilateral/multilateral APA – issued by the Head of National Revenue Administration after obtaining foreign tax authorities’ consent.

An APA decision is binding from the date of submitting the APA application to the Head of National Revenue Administration.

Under law, the decision will be binding upon the tax authorities in the case of other tax procedures (such as tax audits and tax-legal proceedings).

Under the Polish Tax Ordinance, the filing fee for an APA application is 1% of the transaction value, with the following thresholds:

  • domestic unilateral agreement: PLN 5,000-50,000
  • foreign unilateral agreement: PLN 20,000-100,000
  • bilateral/multilateral agreement: PLN 50,000-200,000.

The APA may be issued for a period not longer than 5 years, with a possible extension for the following 5-year period.

Non-recognition and re-characterisation of a controlled transaction

The Polish tax authorities are authorised to interpret the economic rationality of a given transaction carried out by a taxpayer in a way different to the taxpayer. The tax authorities may assess whether in comparable circumstances non-associated enterprises would enter in to such a transaction. The tax authorities’ analysis may result in a determination of a taxpayer’s income or loss, without recognition of the tax implications of the transaction or based on another transaction that, in the tax authorities’ opinion, was in fact concluded between them, i.e. through a so-called re-characterisation of the transaction.

Transfer pricing adjustments

Taxpayers are allowed to adjust the results of related party transactions. TP adjustments will, as a rule, constitute respectively revenue or a tax-deductible expense and will be recognised in the year concerned. 

B. Country-by-Country reporting ("CbCR")

1. Has the obligation to file a CbCR been implemented? If not, is the introduction of the CbCR being considered, and if so, when?

The regulations on CbCR in Poland were introduced in October 2015. As of March 2017, all regulations related to CbCR obligations are specified in the Polish Exchange of Tax Information Act.

Apart from CbCR obligations, Polish taxpayers are also required to submit a CbCP Notification that indicates, among other things, the entity within the capital group (and its tax jurisdiction), responsible for submitting the CbCR.

2. If the obligation to file a CbCR is in force, what is the tax year from which this obligation applies and what is the deadline for filing the CbCR? 

The obligation applies from the tax year starting after 31 December 2015. The deadlines for filing are:

  • CbCR – 12 months following the end of the reporting financial year of the group
  • CbCP Notification – 3 months following the end of the reporting financial year of the group.

3. Which taxpayers are required to file a CbCR under the applicable laws?

According to the Polish Exchange of Tax Information Act, capital groups with consolidated revenues exceeding EUR 750 million or – in case the consolidated revenues of the capital group are presented in zloty – PLN 3,250 million, are obliged to provide a CbCR.

The following taxpayers are responsible for filing the CbCR in Poland:

  • entities qualifying as parent companies of the capital group with tax residence in Poland
  • other entities which qualify as subsidiaries of the capital group with tax residence in Poland, if the following criteria are met:
    • the parent company of the group is not obliged to file the CbCR in its residence jurisdiction, or
    • there is no exchange of information instrument in place with Poland in the residence jurisdiction of the parent company: the parent company’s residence jurisdiction has a current international agreement with Poland, but there is no Qualifying Competent Authority Agreement in place between the two jurisdictions (i.e. the two jurisdictions have not included themselves mutually in the list of jurisdictions to which they intend to exchange the CbCR) by the end of 12 months following the end of the fiscal reporting year of the group
    • there has been a systemic failure to exchange CbCR by the residence jurisdiction of the parent company, which has been notified to the constituent entity by the Polish tax authority
    • the residence jurisdiction of the parent company suspended the exchange of the CbCR based on reasons other than indicated in the Qualifying Competent Authority Agreement concluded with Poland.

In the case of the CbCP Notification, the obligation to submit this notification applies to all entities of the capital group with tax residence in Poland (including foreign taxpayers with PE in Poland).

4. Is the content of the CbCR fully in line with the OECD model (final report on Action 13 of the BEPS project)? If not, what are the differences?

Yes.

5. What is the penalty for failing to file the CbCR on time? Can local subsidiaries of a foreign group suffer the local penalty if the foreign group has not filed the CbCR?

Delayed submission of a CbCR or CbCP Notification, or submission of incomplete or incorrect information, would trigger a fine of up to PLN 1 million (approximately EUR 230,000).

Only the entity that should have submitted the CbCR (parent company or subsidiary appointed by the capital group to file the CbCR) or the CbCP Notification would be liable for the above fine in the case of non-compliance.

In addition, reporting false information in the CbCR or the CbCP Notification might result in individuals employed in the entity facing a fine of up to 240 daily rates (e.g. the amount of the fine in 2024 might range between approximately EUR 8,000-3.2 million or PLN 35,000-14 million).

6. Are there tax treaties in force allowing the communication of CbCR with other jurisdictions?

In January 2016 Poland signed the Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement for the automatic exchange of CbCR.

In addition, in December 2017, Poland entered into an arrangement with the US on the exchange of CbCR reports.

7. Any other relevant aspect not addressed above?

N/A

C. As the case may be, other documentation / filing requirement in relation to transfer pricing?

1. Are there any other documentation/filing requirements in relation to TP?

As indicated in section A/Q1, taxpayers in Poland are obliged to prepare and submit information on TP to the Polish tax authorities. There are two types of form which are intended for two groups of taxpayers:

  • TPR-C for corporate income tax (CIT) taxpayers
  • TPR-P for personal income tax (PIT) taxpayers.

The TP information requires providing the tax authorities with a wider range of data (e.g. taxpayer’s financial ratios, benchmarking study results) that allows the authorities to select enterprises for TP control in a more effective and efficient manner.

TPR-C/TPR-P also include a statement on preparing the Local File. This “Transfer Pricing Statement” should confirm that the TP Local File is in place and that documented transactions are at arm’s length.

2. If so, what is the content of such documentation / filing requirement? What language(s) are to be used by taxpayers?    

TPR-C/TPR-P forms have to be filed in Polish.

3. What is the deadline for meeting this documentation / filing requirement?

The statutory deadline for submitting TPR-C/TPR-P forms is 11 months after the end of a fiscal year.

4. Does this obligation apply to all taxpayers, or only to certain categories (e.g. taxpayers with turnover or assets exceeding a particular threshold)?

The obligation to submit TPR-C/TPR-P forms applies to:

  • entities obliged to prepare the Local File
  • entities exempted from the obligation to produce Local Files, such as:
    • conclusion of a transaction between Polish enterprises (only) that did not demonstrate a tax loss for the documented period and did not take advantage of selected tax exemptions (e.g. in connection with carrying out their operations within an SEZ)
    • conclusion of a transaction subject to an APA
    • transactions subject to safe harbours (once statutory conditions have been fulfilled)
    • re-invoicing transactions (once statutory conditions have been fulfilled)
  • transactions other than controlled transactions concluded with entities located in a so-called tax haven.

5. What is the penalty for failing to meet this requirement on time?

The possible sanctions for failing to meet the requirements on additional reporting in the area of TP concerns by submitting false information in the TPR-C/TPR-P form, or by not submitting the required TPR-C/TPR-P form, include a fine of up to 720 daily rates (for 2024, the fine might amount to approximately EUR 9.7 million or PLN 41.3 million).

In the case of submitting the documents after the statutory deadline, a fine of up to 240 daily rates might be imposed (for 2024, the fine might amount to approximately EUR 8,000-3.2 million or PLN 35,000-14 million).

Since 2022 TPR-C/TPR-P forms can only be signed via qualified electronic signature by:

  • a natural person – in the case of a natural person submitting the TPR-P form on his/her own behalf
  • a person authorised by the foreign entrepreneur to represent him/her in the branch – in the case of a related entity that is a foreign entrepreneur with a branch operating in Poland
  • the head of the entity as defined in Article 3(1)(6) of the Accounting Act, or if the entity is headed by a multi-member body, by a designated person who is a member of that body
  • attorney, but only one who is an advocate, legal adviser, tax adviser or auditor.

Failure to submit, or to improperly complete, a TPR-C/TPR-P form shall be the personal responsibility of the members of the Management Board. A proxy (who is an attorney, legal counsel, tax advisor or auditor) may also be held criminally liable for breaching his/her obligations to file a TPR-C/TPR-P form.

In addition, persons signing a TPR-C/TPR-P form should have a qualified electronic signature which includes a PESEL number. In practice this means that foreigners must create their PESEL number and then use this number when creating a qualified electronic signature.

6. Any other relevant aspect not addressed above?   

N/A