Taxation of road salt storage facilities with property tax

Changes to property tax effective from 2025 increasingly demonstrate that the classification of buildings is no longer straightforward. One area that raises particular concerns is the taxation of road salt storage facilities.

In practice, we observe significant discrepancies in the approach of tax authorities, even when the facts are very similar. This leads to real tax risks, as the classification of a facility as a building or structure directly impacts the amount of tax liability.

Why is qualification crucial?

The difference between a building and a structure in property tax is fundamental:

• buildings are taxed based on usable area,
• buildings – on their value.

In the case of infrastructure facilities, such as salt storage facilities, the financial implications of this qualification can be very significant.

Divergent positions of tax authorities

An analysis of the latest individual interpretations shows that tax authorities have not developed a uniform approach.

Example: interpretation of the Mayor of Jaworzno

In the interpretation of June 12, 2025, the company indicated that the salt warehouses:

• are closed and roofed facilities,
• they perform a protective function (protecting the salt from moisture),
• their basic technical parameter is capacity.

At the same time, the company argued that the facility meets the criteria for both a building and a structure, but due to its function and the nature of storing bulk material, it should be treated as a structure.

The tax authority disagreed with this position. It indicated that recognizing a facility as a structure is only justified if it was designed as a reservoir, and its primary technical parameter is capacity. In the case at hand, it was determined that the salt storage facility did not meet these criteria and should be classified as a building.

Position of other bodies: dominant direction

Other tax authorities also presented a similar approach.

The Mayor of Gliwice pointed out that simply adapting a facility for salt storage doesn’t mean that its primary technical parameter is capacity. In his opinion, a salt warehouse, even a domed structure, remains a building whose function is to store materials.

In turn, the Mayor of Szczekociny decided that the salt warehouse meets all the requirements of the definition of a building:

• has a roof and walls,
• is permanently attached to the ground,
• is equipped with installations,
• its basic parameter is usable area.

Importantly, the body referred to the resolution of the Supreme Administrative Court from 2021, even though it was issued under the previous legal status.

The Mayor of Zabrze expressed a similar opinion, emphasizing that the ability to determine the usable area and meeting the building’s structural requirements determines its classification as a building. In his opinion, the method of storing salt (e.g., directly on the floor) does not change the character of the building.

A different position – interpretation of the Mayor of Racibórz

Against the background of the above decisions, the interpretation of the Mayor of Racibórz of 29 April 2025 stands out, in which salt warehouses were classified as structures.

The authority shared the applicant’s arguments, according to which:

• the facility is used to collect bulk materials,
• its basic technical parameter is capacity (expressed e.g. in tons).

As a result, it was assumed that the warehouse met the criteria for recognition as a building, without requiring further detailed justification.

Where is the problem?

The presented interpretations show that the key point of the dispute is to determine:
what constitutes the basic technical parameter of a warehouse – area or capacity?

Authorities recognizing warehouses as buildings focus on:

• design features,
• possibility of determining the usable area,
• classic warehouse function.

In turn, the approach qualifying them as buildings emphasizes:

• function of storing bulk materials,
• the importance of capacity as a key technical parameter.

Our conclusions

In our opinion, this issue remains highly risky for taxpayers. Despite the prevailing interpretation that salt storage facilities should be classified as buildings, in our opinion such a classification is not without risk, as we see arguments in favor of recognizing their primary parameter as capacity.

What’s next?

If you have any doubts regarding the taxation of warehouses or other facilities in real estate tax, it is worth analysing the situation before a possible inspection and considering applying for an individual interpretation to secure your tax settlements.

The changing practice of authorities shows that even seemingly obvious classifications can be challenged.