The payments team usually asks whether it is enough to check a counterparty on the register of VAT taxpayers (wykaz podatników VAT, the “white list”) once, at the start of the business relationship. It is not enough. The provisions assess the account against the register as it stands on the day each transfer is ordered. For invoices covering goods and services listed in Annex 15 to the VAT Act (ustawa o VAT), they also assess the method of payment. A single mistake hits tax-deductible costs, liability for the supplier’s VAT and the VAT settlement all at once. We show how to calculate the PLN 15,000 threshold, when the ZAW-NR notification protects you, how the authorities assess a remedial transfer and what evidence of due diligence to prepare before an audit.
One transfer, three regimes
A transfer for a transaction above PLN 15,000 is assessed at the same time for income tax, under the Tax Ordinance (Ordynacja podatkowa) and for VAT, and the threshold is based on the value of the transaction, not of an instalment.
Article 15d(1) of the CIT Act (ustawa o CIT) and Article 22p(1) of the PIT Act (ustawa o PIT) refer to Article 19 of the Entrepreneurs’ Law (Prawo przedsiębiorców). That provision covers transactions with another entrepreneur where “the one-off value of the transaction, irrespective of the number of payments resulting from it, exceeds PLN 15,000” (translation by the author). The sanction for an account not on the register also requires an invoice and a supplier that is a registered VAT payer. The account is assessed against the content of the register under Article 96b(1) of the VAT Act on the day the transfer is ordered.
Consequences of an incorrect payment for a transaction above PLN 15,000
| Situation | CIT and PIT | VAT and the Tax Ordinance | What excludes the consequence | Legal basis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer to an account not on the register; the supplier is a registered VAT payer | no tax-deductible cost to the extent of that payment; adjustment in the month the transfer is ordered | joint and several liability for the supplier’s VAT arrears in the part attributable to the supply | ZAW-NR within 7 days or payment under the split payment mechanism (mechanizm podzielonej płatności, MPP); for CIT and PIT also, among other things, invoices relating to an intra-Community acquisition of goods (wewnątrzwspólnotowe nabycie towarów, WNT) and to imports | Article 15d(1)(2), (2) and (4) of the CIT Act; Article 22p(1)(2), (2) and (4) of the PIT Act; Article 117ba § 1 and § 3(2) of the Tax Ordinance |
| Payment without the MPP for an invoice with items listed in Annex 15 | no tax-deductible cost if the invoice bore the annotation “mechanizm podzielonej płatności” (split payment mechanism) | additional tax liability of 30% of the VAT on those items; fiscal penal liability of a natural person | payment of the VAT amount under the MPP; as regards the 30% sanction – settlement of the entire tax by the supplier | Article 108a(1a), (7) and (8) of the VAT Act; Article 15d(1)(3) of the CIT Act; Article 22p(1)(3) of the PIT Act |
In the tax explanatory notes of 20 December 2019 “Register of VAT taxpayers” (Wykaz podatników VAT), the Minister of Finance (Minister Finansów) indicated that the limit applies to the whole transaction, not to a single payment. Instalments therefore do not remove the consequences. An individual tax ruling of 17 July 2025, no. 0111-KDIB1-1.4010.329.2025.2.MF, concerned a doctor – a registered VAT payer supplying exclusively exempt services. The Director of the National Revenue Information Service (Dyrektor Krajowej Informacji Skarbowej, the Director of the KIS) stated: “Accordingly, the provision of Article 15d(1)(2) of the CIT Act will apply in the present case”.
Record the value of the whole transaction in the payment system, not that of a single instalment. Check the supplier’s status on the register, not the rate on the invoice.
An account not on the register – loss of the cost and the adjustment
Payment to an account that was not on the register on the day the transfer was ordered excludes the cost to the extent of that payment, and you adjust a previously recognised cost in the current period.
Article 15d(2) of the CIT Act and Article 22p(2) of the PIT Act require costs to be reduced or revenue to be increased in the month in which the transfer was ordered. Paragraph 4 of both provisions excludes the sanction on the filing of a ZAW-NR notification and on payment under the MPP. The exclusion also covers invoices relating to WNT, to the importation of goods or the import of services, and to supplies of goods for which the purchaser accounts for the tax. Accounts of banks and cooperative savings and credit unions (spółdzielcza kasa oszczędnościowo-kredytowa, SKOK) used for factoring, collection and their own operations are also protected, provided the purchaser has been informed of this. According to the 2019 explanatory notes, payment to a virtual account linked to an account on the register does not trigger these consequences.
The MPP exclusion also works for invoices in a foreign currency where you pay the VAT under the MPP in PLN and the net amount in the foreign currency – to a foreign account not on the register. The authority accepted such a split for VAT purposes (ruling of 2 January 2026, no. 0114-KDIP1-1.4012.879.2025.2.KOM) and, without reasoning, for CIT purposes (ruling of 17 April 2026, no. 0111-KDIB2-1.4010.70.2026.1.BJ).
The authority may argue that the net amount went to an account not on the register, so the cost is lost to that extent. This argument is not decisive. Article 15d(4)(3) excludes the sanction where payment was made under the MPP, and Article 108a(2)(2) of the VAT Act allows the net amount to be settled “in another way”. A ruling, however, protects only its addressee, so if you have regular foreign-currency flows, consider applying for a ruling of your own.
ZAW-NR – 7 days and the payer’s tax office
The ZAW-NR notification protects the cost and excludes joint and several liability if you file it on the first payment to a given account, within 7 days of ordering the transfer, with your own tax office.
The basis is Article 117ba § 3(2) of the Tax Ordinance, to which Article 15d(4)(1) of the CIT Act and Article 22p(4)(1) of the PIT Act refer. The notification goes to the head of the tax office (naczelnik urzędu skarbowego) “competent for the taxpayer who made the payment of the amount due, within 7 days of the date on which the transfer was ordered”. You can also file it via e-Urząd Skarbowy [the tax administration’s online service]. Procedure templates that point to the invoice issuer’s tax office and a shorter time limit are out of date.
A single notification covers subsequent payments to the same account. In a ruling of 17 April 2025, no. 0114-KDIP2-2.4010.97.2025.2.AP, concerning a factoring bank’s account, the authority repeated after the explanatory notes: “It will be sufficient to make a one-off notification of such an account to the competent head of the tax office”.
The time limit is laid down directly in the statute, so a late notification does not protect you. Build ZAW-NR into the procedure as a step to be taken on the day the system detects an account not on the register, and keep the confirmation together with the proof of transfer.
After the deadline – refund and repeat transfer
Once the time limit for ZAW-NR has passed, the authorities accept a remedy consisting of a refund of the funds by the counterparty and a repeat payment to an account on the register. You will, however, recognise the cost only on the date of the correct payment.
The statutes do not regulate such a remedy; the authority derives it from Article 15d(1)(2) of the CIT Act. In a ruling of 22 July 2026, no. 0111-KDIB1-3.4010.274.2026.2.JKU, it held that “the repeat payment to the Counterparty, whose account is included on the so-called white list of VAT taxpayers, resulted in the validation of the previous error”. It refused, however, to leave the costs in the years of the original payments: “Treatment as tax-deductible costs will, however, be possible on the date on which the correct payments are made to the proper bank account”. It took the same view in a ruling of 23 July 2026, no. 0111-KDIB1-1.4010.306.2026.1.SG, and, for PIT where the MPP had been bypassed, in a ruling of 16 October 2025, no. 0115-KDIT3.4011.716.2025.1.DP.
The authority may argue that the refund and the repeat transfer merely move the same funds around. This argument is not decisive if the flows are genuine and documented – in the cases cited, the counterparty returned the money and the taxpayer paid again. The remedy does not operate retroactively: you reduce the costs in the month of the original transfer and recognise them again on the date of the correct payment.
Agree the refund with the counterparty in writing and pay again to an account on the register or under the MPP. Where the amounts are material, apply for a ruling of your own.
Joint and several liability for the supplier’s VAT
A transfer to an account not on the register exposes the purchaser to joint and several liability for the supplier’s VAT arrears – but only up to the tax on the supply concerned and only where no statutory exclusion applies.
Article 117ba § 1 of the Tax Ordinance links this liability to payment of a registered VAT payer’s invoice to an account not on the register, and according to the 2019 explanatory notes it covers only the tax on the specific supply. Under § 3 of that Article, the liability is excluded, among other things, for a transaction other than one specified in Article 19 of the Entrepreneurs’ Law (point 1) and after a ZAW-NR notification has been filed (point 2). According to the explanatory notes, payment under the MPP also provides protection. Article 105a of the VAT Act provides for a separate regime: a purchaser of goods listed in Annex 15 is liable, among other things, where it knew or had reasonable grounds to suspect that the tax would not be paid. According to the Ministry of Finance (Ministerstwo Finansów, MF), payment under the MPP releases the purchaser from this liability as well.
The authority identifies two consequences of payment to an account not on the register – no tax-deductible cost and “joint and several liability for VAT” (ruling no. 0114-KDIP2-2.4010.97.2025.2.AP cited above). The provisions on the register do not, by contrast, take away the right to deduct.
The authority may argue that, in a dispute over deduction, an account not on the register shows a lack of due diligence. This does not work automatically – the Ministry of Finance’s Methodology states that failure to take the steps described in it does not in itself mean loss of the right to deduct. If you have doubts about a supplier, however, pay the VAT under the MPP even where this is not mandatory.
MPP – the obligation, the sanctions and the income tax condition
The MPP obligation applies to invoices with items listed in Annex 15 for a total amount due above PLN 15,000; bypassing the mechanism costs you in VAT and, where the invoice bears the annotation, also in CIT and PIT.
Article 108a(1a) of the VAT Act requires the MPP for payment for such goods or services “documented by an invoice in which the total amount due exceeds the amount of PLN 15,000”. The issuer must accept such a payment (paragraph 1b) and marks the invoice with the words “mechanizm podzielonej płatności” (Article 106e(1)(18a)); it is separately liable for failing to include the annotation (Article 106e(12)). You pay using a split payment transfer message in PLN, stating the VAT amount and the invoice number (Article 108a(3)).
Bypassing the MPP has three consequences. For VAT, the authority determines an additional tax liability “in an amount corresponding to 30% of the amount of tax attributable to the purchased goods or services listed in Annex 15 to the Act” (Article 108a(7)). It does not determine that liability with respect to a natural person who is liable for the same act for a fiscal offence or a fiscal petty offence, nor where the supplier has accounted for the entire amount of tax on the invoice (paragraph 8). For income tax, the cost is lost only where the invoice bears the annotation (Article 15d(1)(3) of the CIT Act, Article 22p(1)(3) of the PIT Act). A fine under the Fiscal Penal Code (Kodeks karny skarbowy) may also be imposed.
The obligation concerns only the amount of the tax. Citing the explanatory notes on the MPP, the authority stated in ruling no. 0115-KDIT3.4011.716.2025.1.DP: “It is possible to pay under the split payment mechanism only the amount corresponding to the amount of VAT shown on the invoice”.
Hypothetical example: a company uses an ordinary transfer to pay an invoice bearing the annotation, issued for construction services listed in Annex 15, for PLN 24,600, including PLN 4,600 of VAT. If no exclusion applies, the additional tax liability is PLN 4,600 × 30% = PLN 1,380. The lost cost is PLN 24,600 − PLN 4,600 = PLN 20,000, which at a 19% CIT rate means tax higher by PLN 20,000 × 19% = PLN 3,800. In total, PLN 1,380 + PLN 3,800 = PLN 5,180.
The authority may argue that the absence of the annotation does not release the purchaser from the obligation. For VAT, the authority is right: Article 108a(1a) bases the obligation on the subject matter and the amount of the invoice, and the annotation condition operates only in Article 15d and Article 22p. The obligation also applies to a public contracting authority that is a VAT payer. Classify invoices by reference to Annex 15 and the total amount due, not by the annotation.
Due diligence – a procedure that generates evidence
You will not demonstrate due diligence with a statement made after an audit – the authority assesses evidence dating from the start of the business relationship, the transaction and the payment, so the procedure must generate it on an ongoing basis.
The VAT Act does not contain a list of such steps. The register under Article 96b makes it possible to check whether an entity was on it on a selected day, not earlier than 5 years before the year in which the check is made (paragraph 2). You can therefore reconstruct the history, but you cannot prove that the check took place before payment. The authorities’ expectations are described in the Ministry of Finance’s “Methodology for assessing the exercise of due diligence by purchasers of goods in domestic transactions” (Metodyka w zakresie oceny dochowania należytej staranności przez nabywców towarów w transakcjach krajowych). These are non-binding guidelines for the authorities’ staff. The Methodology distinguishes between formal and transactional criteria – at the start and during the continuation of a business relationship – and covers the register and the MPP.
Payment procedure – what to check and how to evidence it
| Stage | What to check | Evidence | Legal basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| New counterparty | VAT status, registration details, accounts on the register | record of the search, extract from the National Court Register (Krajowy Rejestr Sądowy, KRS) or from the Central Register and Information on Economic Activity (Centralna Ewidencja i Informacja o Działalności Gospodarczej, CEIDG) | Article 96b(1) and (2) of the VAT Act |
| Unusual transaction terms | price, method of delivery, the counterparty’s resources | correspondence and a note of the assessment | MF Methodology – transactional criteria |
| Every transfer for a transaction above PLN 15,000 | whether the account shown on the invoice is on the register on the day the transfer is ordered | confirmation of the check made on that day | Article 15d(1)(2) of the CIT Act; Article 117ba § 1 of the Tax Ordinance |
| Invoice with items listed in Annex 15 above PLN 15,000 | payment under the MPP regardless of the annotation | split payment transfer message | Article 108a(1a) and (3) of the VAT Act |
| Change of the counterparty’s account | new number on the register, confirmation through another channel | the counterparty’s letter, approval by a second person | MF Methodology – continuation of the business relationship |
| Payment to an account not on the register | ZAW-NR within 7 days to your own tax office | confirmation of filing | Article 117ba § 3(2) of the Tax Ordinance |
The authority may argue that a printout from the register does not prove good faith where the transaction is on non-market terms. That is why the procedure covers the transactional criteria, and the Methodology also allows due diligence to be demonstrated in other ways. We recommend blocking any transfer that has no recorded check from the day it is ordered.
From 1 January 2027 – the KSeF number in the transfer and pending legislation
From 1 January 2027, a registered VAT payer paying another registered VAT payer for structured invoices must state in the transfer the invoice’s number in the National e-Invoicing System (Krajowy System e-Faktur, KSeF) or the collective identifier. This is a provision in force, not a bill.
The obligation under Article 108g(1) of the VAT Act covers a credit transfer order and other instruments that carry a transfer reference, including where the payment is made by a taxpayer other than the purchaser. For a direct debit, the obligation rests with the issuer (paragraph 2), and the payee’s status is determined by reference to the register on the date of payment (paragraph 3). The start date follows from Article 17(2) of the Act of 16 June 2023 amending the VAT Act. The authority quoted it in a ruling of 8 July 2026, no. 0111-KDIB3-1.4012.306.2026.2.MG: “Article 108g of the act amended in Article 1 applies to payments made from 1 January 2027”. In our view, this also applies to a transfer under the MPP, because a split payment transfer message is a credit transfer order.
On 18 September 2026, the Sejm [lower chamber of the Polish Parliament] passed an act providing for the abolition of the loss of the tax-deductible cost on payment to an account not on the register and on bypassing the MPP. The abolition is planned from 1 January 2027. Adopted by the Senate (Senat) without amendments, the act is awaiting the signature of the President [of the Republic of Poland]. An act amending the VAT Act was signed on 25 September 2026. The bill adopted by the Council of Ministers (Rada Ministrów) on 2 June 2026 provided, among other things, for checking VAT payer status up to 5 years back and, in specified cases, for wider liability of purchasers for the arrears of unreliable sellers. Until the acts enter into force, the provisions described above apply.
The authority will apply Article 15d and Article 22p to transfers ordered before the amendments enter into force, unless the transitional provisions provide otherwise. The register and the MPP will remain relevant for as long as Article 117ba of the Tax Ordinance and Article 108a(7) of the VAT Act remain unchanged. Keep the procedure in place and prepare the payment module to include the KSeF number.
The most common mistake
The most common mistake is to check a counterparty’s account only on the first payment and to flag it in the system as permanently verified.
Article 15d(1)(2) of the CIT Act and Article 117ba § 1 of the Tax Ordinance test the register as at the day each transfer is ordered. The 2019 explanatory notes stress that the decisive date is the day the transfer is ordered, not the day the account is debited. Accounts, meanwhile, change – on a change of bank, a conversion of the counterparty, an assignment of receivables or an attempt to substitute the number on an invoice. The system then pays to the number recorded when the supplier was set up, which is no longer on the register. The mistake usually comes to light during an audit, when the time limit for ZAW-NR has long passed and a repeat transfer shifts the cost into the current year.
How to avoid it: check the account automatically when generating each transfer for a transaction above PLN 15,000 and record the result. If there is a mismatch, stop the payment or file ZAW-NR on the same day. Accept a change of account only after confirmation through a channel other than the message carrying the invoice. If it is your business that changes its accounts after a reorganisation, notify them to the register before counterparties make their first payment. See also: Converting a sole trader into a sp. z o.o. — what actually happens to the tax position.
Summary
- Calculate the PLN 15,000 threshold on the value of the whole transaction, not of an instalment, and check the supplier’s VAT status, not the type of its sales.
- Verify the account against the register on the day each transfer is ordered, and if the account is not on the register, file ZAW-NR within 7 days with your own tax office.
- Pay under the MPP every invoice with items listed in Annex 15 above PLN 15,000, regardless of the issuer’s annotation, and, where the supplier is doubtful, also invoices not covered by the obligation.
- After the deadline, remedy the transfer through a genuine refund and a repeat payment, and recognise the cost on the date of the correct payment.
- Keep the procedure in place also after the acts passed by the Sejm are promulgated, and prepare your transfers to include the KSeF number from 1 January 2027.
Sources cited
All quotations from Polish-language sources — statutes, tax rulings and court judgments — are given here in the author's translation; the Polish wording is authoritative.
- Individual tax ruling of the Director of the National Revenue Information Service of 17 April 2025, no. 0114-KDIP2-2.4010.97.2025.2.AP – a one-off ZAW-NR notification of a factoring bank’s account covers subsequent payments to that account; the sanction under Article 15d(1)(2) of the CIT Act does not apply. https://eureka.mf.gov.pl/informacje/podglad/636082
- Individual tax ruling of the Director of the National Revenue Information Service of 17 July 2025, no. 0111-KDIB1-1.4010.329.2025.2.MF – payment to a registered VAT payer supplying exempt services, made to an account not on the register, is covered by Article 15d(1)(2) of the CIT Act. https://eureka.mf.gov.pl/informacje/podglad/649230
- Individual tax ruling of the Director of the National Revenue Information Service of 22 July 2026, no. 0111-KDIB1-3.4010.274.2026.2.JKU – a refund of the funds and a repeat payment to an account on the register remove the sanction, and the cost is recognised on the date of the correct payment. https://eureka.mf.gov.pl/informacje/podglad/701608
- Individual tax ruling of the Director of the National Revenue Information Service of 23 July 2026, no. 0111-KDIB1-1.4010.306.2026.1.SG – the same conclusion for invoices from 2024–2025 paid again in 2026. https://eureka.mf.gov.pl/informacje/podglad/702534
- Individual tax ruling of the Director of the National Revenue Information Service of 16 October 2025, no. 0115-KDIT3.4011.716.2025.1.DP – repeat payment under the MPP of invoices for construction services previously paid bypassing it; the cost for PIT purposes recognised on the date of the repeat payment. https://eureka.mf.gov.pl/informacje/podglad/662464
- Individual tax ruling of the Director of the National Revenue Information Service of 2 January 2026, no. 0114-KDIP1-1.4012.879.2025.2.KOM – payment of VAT under the MPP in PLN and of the net amount in a foreign currency for invoices with items listed in Annex 15. https://eureka.mf.gov.pl/informacje/podglad/674313
- Individual tax ruling of the Director of the National Revenue Information Service of 17 April 2026, no. 0111-KDIB2-1.4010.70.2026.1.BJ – no sanction under Article 15d of the CIT Act where the VAT was paid under the MPP and the net amount in a foreign currency to a foreign account not on the register; the applicant’s position held to be correct without legal reasoning. https://eureka.mf.gov.pl/informacje/podglad/687213
- Individual tax ruling of the Director of the National Revenue Information Service of 8 July 2026, no. 0111-KDIB3-1.4012.306.2026.2.MG – the wording of Article 108g of the VAT Act and its application to payments from 1 January 2027. https://eureka.mf.gov.pl/informacje/podglad/699592
- Tax explanatory notes of 20 December 2019 “Register of VAT taxpayers” (Wykaz podatników VAT) – the threshold calculated on the value of the transaction, the day the transfer is ordered, virtual accounts, notification of an account not on the register, the scope of joint and several liability and its exclusion on payment under the MPP. https://www.gov.pl/attachment/8a4c20be-0b58-47b2-880a-98c9895d8e8d
- Tax explanatory notes of 23 December 2019 on the split payment mechanism – the obligation concerns the amount of VAT, and the threshold is calculated on the total amount due on the invoice; sanctions for the purchaser and the issuer, and exclusion of the purchaser’s sanction where the supplier has accounted for the entire tax. https://www.gov.pl/attachment/36857f08-376f-4a11-ac2a-136ee1ca8957
- Ministry of Finance, “Methodology for assessing the exercise of due diligence by purchasers of goods in domestic transactions” (Metodyka w zakresie oceny dochowania należytej staranności przez nabywców towarów w transakcjach krajowych), updated version – formal and transactional criteria for assessing due diligence in VAT. https://www.podatki.gov.pl/media/7236/aktualizacja-metodyki-w-zakresie-oceny-dochowania-nalezytej-starannosci-przez-nabywcow-towarow-w-transakcjach-krajowych.pdf
- The podatki.gov.pl website, “ZAW-NR notification” (Zawiadomienie ZAW-NR) – the 7-day time limit, the tax office competent for the payer, filing via e-Urząd Skarbowy. https://www.podatki.gov.pl/e-urzad-skarbowy/konto-organizacji/zawiadomienie-zaw-nr
- The podatki.gov.pl website, “Split payment mechanism (MPP)” (Mechanizm podzielonej płatności (MPP)) – conditions of the obligation, sanctions and release from joint and several liability on payment under the MPP. https://www.podatki.gov.pl/podatki-firmowe/vat/poradniki-i-informatory/mechanizm-podzielonej-platnosci-mpp
- Announcement of the adoption by the Council of Ministers on 2 June 2026 of the bill amending the Act on the tax on goods and services and the Act on the rules for the registration and identification of taxpayers and remitters – scope of the bill. https://www.gov.pl/web/premier/projekt-ustawy-o-zmianie-ustawy-o-podatku-od-towarow-i-uslug-oraz-ustawy-o-zasadach-ewidencji-i-identyfikacji-podatnikow-i-platnikow2
Related materials
- KSeF in 2026 – the obligation, offline mode and what changes on 1 January 2027
- Management board members and company tax arrears – what the CJEU judgment in Adjak changed
Why we do this
As a tax advisor I take care of the substantive quality of our free materials. My aim is to educate the market through reliable analyses that allow entrepreneurs to apply the law safely in practice.
Get in touch →Legal basis: Act of 11 March 2004 on the tax on goods and services (consolidated text: Dz.U. z 2025 r. poz. 775, as amended): Article 96b(1) and (2), Article 105a, Article 106e(1)(18a) and (12), Article 108a(1), (1a), (1b), (2), (3), (7) and (8), Article 108g(1)–(4), Annex 15; Act of 15 February 1992 on corporate income tax (consolidated text: Dz.U. z 2026 r. poz. 554, as amended): Article 15d(1), (2) and (4); Act of 26 July 1991 on personal income tax (consolidated text: Dz.U. z 2026 r. poz. 592, as amended): Article 22p(1), (2) and (4); Act of 29 August 1997 – Tax Ordinance (consolidated text: Dz.U. z 2026 r. poz. 622, as amended): Article 117ba § 1 and § 3; Act of 6 March 2018 – Entrepreneurs’ Law (consolidated text: Dz.U. z 2025 r. poz. 1480, as amended): Article 19; Act of 16 June 2023 amending the Act on the tax on goods and services and certain other acts: Article 17(2).