NSA: The tax office will pay for its own mistake
Obtaining an individual tax ruling is intended to provide taxpayers with tax security. However, what happens if the taxpayer complies with the ruling, pays tax, and then a court finds the ruling unlawful?
The Supreme Administrative Court answered this question in its judgment of 3 June 2026 (II FSK 162/26), taking a position favorable to taxpayers.
Facts
The case concerned a taxpayer who applied for an individual interpretation regarding the tax consequences of the sale of plots of land.
The taxpayer complied with the ruling and paid income tax accordingly. However, the ruling was subsequently legally overturned by an administrative court as unlawful. After reconsidering the case, the Director of the National Tax Information Office issued a new ruling, this time confirming the taxpayer’s position.
As a result, it turned out that the tax had been paid unduly and the taxpayer had incurred an overpayment.
The tax authority refunded the overpaid tax, but refused to pay interest for the period in which it had the taxpayer’s funds at its disposal.
The position of the tax authorities
The tax authorities argued that the provisions of the Tax Ordinance provide for interest on overpayments only in cases expressly indicated by the legislator.
In their opinion, the list of these situations is closed and does not include an overpayment resulting from the application of an individual interpretation which was subsequently annulled by the administrative court.
As a result, the authorities decided that the refund of the overpayment alone was sufficient and the taxpayer was not entitled to interest.
The courts sided with the taxpayer
First, the Regional Administrative Court in Poznań ruled in favor of the taxpayer (judgment of 23 October 2025, I SA/Po 422/25). The court noted that the situation of a taxpayer who paid tax due to an incorrect tax interpretation is very similar to the situation of a taxpayer who paid tax based on an incorrect tax decision.
The justification for the Regional Administrative Court’s position reads: “In the Court’s opinion, a situation that could place a taxpayer (like the complainant) in a worse position than a taxpayer who, by paying undue tax in compliance with a decision that was subsequently repealed, is unacceptable. Such a division of taxpayers, solely based on the form of the administrative act, i.e., an individual interpretation instead of a decision, was deemed unlawful in both cases as a result of an audit, would consequently violate the constitutional principle of equality.”
This position was fully shared by the Supreme Administrative Court.
NSA: the taxpayer should not bear the consequences of the authority’s error.
The Supreme Administrative Court emphasized that the protection resulting from the application of an individual interpretation cannot be illusory.
According to the Supreme Administrative Court, a taxpayer who trusted the authority and acted in accordance with the issued interpretation should not suffer any negative consequences if it was later found to be defective.
In its justification, the Supreme Administrative Court indicated, among other things: “There are no grounds for differentiating taxpayers in terms of their right to the same method of calculating interest on overpayments, depending on the basis of which incorrect act taken by the authority they made the undue tax payment (individual interpretation or decision) (…) by refusing the right to interest on overpayments, the authority grants itself the right to make an error that is not burdened with consequences.”
Therefore, the Supreme Administrative Court found that the taxpayer was entitled to interest on the overpayment for the entire period from its occurrence to the date of refund.
Why is this judgment important?
The ruling undoubtedly has a much broader significance than just for taxpayers applying for interpretations regarding the sale of real estate, as it strengthens the principle of citizens’ trust in the state.
In practice, the ruling confirms that a taxpayer who relies on an individual tax ruling issued should not bear the economic consequences of errors made by the tax authorities.
How can we help?
If you have used an individual tax ruling in the past that was subsequently annulled or proved to be incorrect, it is worth verifying whether there are grounds for claiming interest on the overpayment.
We support clients at every stage of proceedings involving individual tax rulings, tax overpayments, and disputes with tax authorities. Please contact us.
