Abstract
The constitutional principle that imposition of tax should be based on a written statute, embedded in article 84 of the Polish Constitution, is in opposition to the notion of an anti-avoidance rule. When Poland began to move to a market economy in the early 1990s, the legislature made unsuccessful attempts to adopt a GAAR. Attempts by the courts to employ a judicial anti-avoidance rule were overturned by the Supreme Administrative Court. Enactment of a type of GAAR in the General Tax Law, which would have allowed the taxing authority to re-determine tax consequences if the taxpayer attempted to circumvent tax liability, was quashed by the Constitutional Tribunal. Ultimately, a type of substance over form principle in the Income Tax Law, article 199a was held constitutional. It permits the taxing authority to determine tax consequences on the basis of the true transaction configured by the parties.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
See, for instance, J. Głuchowski, Polskie prawo podatkowe, Warszawa 1998, pp. 107–115; M. Kalinowski, Granice legalności unikania opodatkowania w polskim systemie podatkowym, Toruń 2001, pp. 9–12.
- 2.
The problem does not pertain solely to Polish courts – see, for instance, A. Zalasiński, Some Basic Aspects of the Concept of Abuse in the Tax Case Law of the European Court of Justice, Intertax 2008, Vol. 36, issue 4, p. 167.
- 3.
Dziennik Ustaw (Journal of Laws, Dz. U.) No. 78, item 483 as amended.
- 4.
See, for instance, the judgment of the Supreme Court (Sąd Najwyższy) of the 6th of April 2001, III RN 90/00, LEX, No. 448051.
- 5.
See, for instance, the judgment of the Regional Administrative Court (Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny) in Warsaw of the 12th of September 2008, III SA/Wa 922/08, LEX, No. 462039.
- 6.
See, M. Kalinowski, op. cit., p. 58.
- 7.
See, for instance, the judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal (Trybunał Konstytucyjny) of the 21st of June 2004, SK 22/03.
- 8.
K. Lasiński-Sulecki, Proper Publication of Legal Texts Relevant for Taxation, Intertax 2009, Vol. 37, issue 6/7, p. 418.
- 9.
See, J. Głuchowski, op. cit., p. 111.
- 10.
The Republic of Poland shall be a democratic state ruled by law and implementing the principles of social justice.
- 11.
This is unlike Anglo-Saxon countries where one may notice “judicial legislation” within the sphere of means serving to counteract tax avoidance. See B. Brzeziński, Anglosaskie doktryny orzecznicze dotyczące unikania opodatkowania, Toruń 1996, pp. 5–8.
- 12.
Dz. U. No. 54, item 654, as amended.
- 13.
See the judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of the 7th of November 1991, I SA/Po 1198/91, where the judicial anti-avoidance doctrine began to develop.
- 14.
Dz. U. No. 16, item 93 as amended.
- 15.
See H. Litwińczuk, Obejście prawa podatkowego w świetle doświadczeń międzynarodowych, Przegląd Podatkowy 1999, No. 9.
- 16.
See Z. Radwański, Prawo cywilne – część ogólna, Warszawa 1997, p. 237.
- 17.
See B. Brzeziński, Szkice z wykładni prawa podatkowego, Gdańsk 2002, p. 70; R. Mastalski, Interpretacja prawa podatkowego, Wrocław 1989, p. 120.
- 18.
See E. Zuelta-Puceiro, Statutory Interpretation in Argentina, [in:] Interpreting Statutes. A Comparative Study, eds. D. MacCormick, R. Summers, Dartmouth 1991, p. 47.
- 19.
See J. Van Houtte, Principles of Interpretation in Internal and International Tax Law, Amsterdam 1968, p. 36.
- 20.
See, for instance, the judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of the 25th of June 1998, I SA/Po 1883/97, LEX No. 35484.
- 21.
Dz. U. No. 11, item 50 as amended.
- 22.
Dz. U. 2001, No. 75, item 802 as amended.
- 23.
See, for instance, the judgments of the Supreme Administrative Court of the 31st of January 2002, I SA/Gd 771/01; of the 29th of May 2002, III SA 2602/00 and the judgment of the Supreme Court of the 19th of October 2000, III RN 55/00.
- 24.
Dz. U. No. 137, item 926 as amended (currently: Dz. U. 2005, No. 8, item 60 as amended).
- 25.
See M. Kalinowski, Wykładnia oświadczeń woli oraz ich pozorność w prawie podatkowym, Przegląd Podatkowy 2003, No. 1, pp. 45–50.
- 26.
See P. Karwat, Obejście prawa podatkowego, Przegląd Podatkowy 2003, No. 2, p. 46 et seq.
- 27.
K 4/03.
- 28.
- 29.
- 30.
Restrictions are also applicable in the case of loans granted by one company to another company, provided that the same shareholder owns at least 25% of shares in both companies.
- 31.
OJ L 310, pp. 1–5.
- 32.
See Art. 5(2) of the Council Directive 2003/49/EC of 3 June 2003 on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments made between associated companies of different Member States, OJ L 157, pp. 49–54.
- 33.
A. Zalasiński, National Report – Poland, [in:] Tax Treaties and Tax Avoidance: Applications of Anti-Avoidance Provisions, IFA Cahiers 2010, Vol. 95A, p. 648.
- 34.
Reference to beneficial ownership is rather common in the Polish tax treaties.
- 35.
Art. 10(2) of the treaty with the United Kingdom of 2005, Art. 10(2) of the treaty with Denmark.
- 36.
Art. 11(7) of the treaty with Greece of 1987, Art. 11(8) of the treaty with Mexico of 1998, Art. 11(7) of the treaty with Chile of 2000.
- 37.
Art. 24(3) of the treaty with Germany of 2003.
- 38.
Art. 25 of the treaty with Israel of 1991, Art. 27 of the treaty with Sweden of 2004.
- 39.
For instance, Art. 13(2) of the treaty with Austria of 2004, Art. 13(4) of the treaty with Belgium of 2001, Art. 13(5) of the treaty with Denmark, Art. 13(4) of the treaty with New Zealand, Art. 13(2) of the treaty with the United Kingdom.
- 40.
Art. 17(2) of the treaty with Denmark of 2001, Art. 18(2) of the treaty with the Netherlands.
- 41.
Art. 22(3) of the treaty with Germany of 2003, A. Zalasiński, National Report…, op. cit., p. 648.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Brzeziński, B., Lasiński-Sulecki, K. (2012). Poland. In: Brown, K. (eds) A Comparative Look at Regulation of Corporate Tax Avoidance. Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, vol 12. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2342-9_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2342-9_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2341-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2342-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)