{"id":5386,"date":"2026-07-03T09:57:01","date_gmt":"2026-07-03T07:57:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/clpodatki.pl\/?p=5386"},"modified":"2026-10-13T11:05:15","modified_gmt":"2026-10-13T09:05:15","slug":"the-national-labor-inspectorate-reform-is-getting-closer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/clpodatki.pl\/en\/the-national-labor-inspectorate-reform-is-getting-closer\/","title":{"rendered":"The National Labor Inspectorate reform is getting closer"},"content":{"rendered":"

In this article, we analyze what tax consequences may arise from questioning B2B cooperation and why it is worth verifying current cooperation models before the new regulations come into force.<\/span><\/p>\n

From July 8, 2026, information on PIP findings will be sent to the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) and the National Tax Administration (KAS). Reclassification of a B2B contract may trigger consequences not only for the future but also for previous settlements. This may include corrections to PIT, consequences for CIT, and, above all, serious potential risks related to VAT.<\/span><\/p>\n

Data exchange between PIP, ZUS and KAS<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

One of the key elements of the reform is the creation of an IT system enabling the exchange of information between the National Labor Inspectorate, the Social Insurance Institution and the Head of the National Revenue Administration.<\/span><\/p>\n

The aim of the system is to analyze the risk of violations of labor law, legality of employment, tax law, social security and health insurance \u2013 each of these institutions will gain access to a wider range of data collected by other authorities.<\/span><\/p>\n

If the National Labor Inspectorate (PIP) determines the existence of an employment relationship, this information can be forwarded to both the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) and the tax authorities. In turn, data obtained by the National Revenue Administration (KAS) and ZUS can help labor inspectors identify cases of bogus self-employment.<\/span><\/p>\n

Is the PIP decision retroactive?<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The new regulations allow the labor inspector to issue an administrative decision confirming the existence of an employment relationship. Generally, such a decision takes effect from the date of its issuance.<\/span><\/p>\n

The employer and the employee may appeal the decision to the labor court. An appeal suspends its execution until the proceedings are finally concluded. Only in exceptional cases involving individuals with special protection, such as pregnant women or employees nearing retirement age, will it be possible to make the decision immediately enforceable.<\/span><\/p>\n

However, if it is necessary to establish that an employment relationship existed previously, the case will still need to be referred to a labor court. An administrative decision alone will not automatically have retroactive effects.<\/span><\/p>\n

This doesn’t mean, however, that the past will remain beyond the authorities’ attention. Information about the establishment of an employment relationship may trigger tax or social security (ZUS) audits covering periods not yet time-barred.<\/span><\/p>\n

Reclassification of a B2B contract and the consequences in PIT<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The most obvious consequence of reclassifying the employment relationship is a change in the source of income. Remuneration previously accounted for as income from non-agricultural business activity (B2B contract) or personally performed activity (contract of mandate) may now be recognized as income from employment.<\/span><\/p>\n

For entrepreneurs using contractor services, this means fulfilling the obligations of a personal income tax payer. They are obligated to collect advance personal income tax payments according to the rules applicable to employees (12% and 32%), and to prepare appropriate tax returns and information. This is directly related to their net income.<\/span><\/p>\n

Much more serious consequences may arise if tax authorities question the accounting treatment for previous years. If it is determined that the B2B relationship should be treated as an employment relationship from the outset, it may be necessary to re-examine historical tax and contribution settlements.<\/span><\/p>\n

In such a situation, the remuneration previously paid to the employee may be treated as a net amount. This would require determining the corresponding gross remuneration and settling any PIT and ZUS contributions due. Tax authorities may also demand payment of arrears for periods that have not yet expired. This is because the obligation to calculate, collect, and remit income tax advances rests with the payer, i.e., the employer.<\/span><\/p>\n

For the employee, reclassification may mean losing the right to preferential taxation options available to entrepreneurs, such as a flat-rate tax or a lump sum tax on recorded income. The rules for accounting for costs and the method of calculating tax burdens also change.<\/span><\/p>\n

At the same time, a taxpayer who previously settled tax as an entrepreneur may, in certain situations, apply for a refund of overpayment resulting from double taxation of the same remuneration.<\/span><\/p>\n

Consequences for CIT purposes<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Reclassification of B2B relationships also affects the way in which tax costs are recognized.<\/span><\/p>\n

In the standard model, an entrepreneur deducts expenses resulting from invoices documenting the purchase of services from a contractor conducting business activity as tax-deductible costs. However, if it turns out that the collaboration should be treated as an employment relationship, we see a risk that these documents will lose their original tax function.<\/span><\/p>\n

This does not automatically mean that you lose your right to deduct tax-deductible costs. However, it may be necessary to recreate the settlements using the formula appropriate for employee salaries. In practice, this requires detailed calculations, determining the gross salary, and taking into account contributions and other charges related to the employment relationship.<\/span><\/p>\n

VAT \u2013 the area of \u200b\u200bgreatest risk<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The most serious consequences may arise in the area of \u200b\u200bgoods and services tax.<\/span><\/p>\n

Pursuant to Article 15, Section 3, Point 1 of the VAT Act and Article 10 of the VAT Directive, economic activity must be independent in nature. Both national and EU regulations indicate that activities performed under conditions similar to an employment relationship are not considered independent activities.<\/span><\/p>\n

When assessing the nature of cooperation, tax authorities analyze, among others:<\/span><\/p>\n