ÀÖÓ㣨Leyu£©ÌåÓý¹ÙÍø

The ÀÖÓ㣨Leyu£©ÌåÓý¹ÙÍø member firm in Poland prepared a report that includes summaries of the following decisions of the Supreme Administrative Court:

• The court on March 19, 2025, held (case II FSK 856/22) that Article 16i(5) of the CIT Act allows taxpayers to adjust depreciation rates retroactively starting from the month in which fixed assets were entered in the registry or from the first month of a new taxable year.
• The court on March 19, 2025, held (case III FSK 3/25) that the exclusion from the real estate tax exemption under Article 7(1)(9) of the Act on Local Taxes and Fees for land used to run business activity does not include land merely in a business owner’s possession if it is not used in their business activities.
• The court on March 18, 2025, held (case II FSK 246/24) that if a real estate company treats its fixed assets categorized into group 1 of fixed assets as assets depreciable under accounting regulations, it must observe the limits on depreciation write-offs provided for by Article 15(6) of the CIT Act. However, if the company treats real estate as investment property, meaning that it is valued at its fair market value and is not depreciable under accounting regulations, such limits do not apply.
• The court on March 18, 2025, held (case II FSK 805/22) that the reimbursement of employees for accommodation expenses and costs associated with the use of private vehicles for work constitute taxable fringe benefits provided by the employer under Article 2(1) of the PIT Act. Costs related to the use of a private vehicle are not exempt from taxation under Article 21(1)(23b) of the PIT Act, as they are not regulated by a separate law, but the reimbursement of accommodation expenses may qualify for tax exemption under Article 21(1)(19) of the PIT Act.

Read a March 2025 report prepared by the ÀÖÓ㣨Leyu£©ÌåÓý¹ÙÍø member firm in Poland