Property tax –a pending new definition of a structure and grounds for claiming tax refunds

28 July 2023 | Knowledge, News, Tax Focus

Property tax is among the statutory charges that apply to both businesses and individuals who are not engaged in business activity. In accordance with the Act on Local Taxes and Fees (“Act”), property tax is levied on:

  • Land
  • Buildings or parts thereof
  • Buildings or parts thereof related to the conduct of business activity

The definition of the object of taxation for the purposes of property tax has been a matter of much controversy for years, and the problem has ultimately found its way to the Constitutional Tribunal.

An immanent element of the disputes with the tax authorities was the proper definition of a structure for the purposes of paying property tax. There have been many attempts in case law to develop a definition, but this has not been sufficient to put an end to the disputes between taxpayers and tax authorities.

The failure to apply the definition in a uniform and effective manner led to the case reaching the Constitutional Tribunal, resulting in a landmark judgment of 4 July 2023 (Case No. SK 14/21) in which the CT declared Article 1a(1)(2) of the Act, which contains the definition of a structure, to be unconstitutional, but upheld this provision for a further 18 months.

Why there is a need for a new definition of a structure

The Act defines the property tax rate separately for buildings and structures. In the case of structures, the rate is 2 % of their value, and in the case of buildings, the tax is determined based on their usable area.

The correct determination of whether a facility is a building or a structure significantly affects taxation, which in most cases will be more favourable if the rate for buildings is deemed to be applicable.

The Act’s definition of a structure contains a reference to broadly defined construction law.

In the judgment in question, the Constitutional Tribunal noted that the reference to non-tax provisions on such an important issue as the object of taxation violates the Constitution. What is more, the definition contained in the construction law also does not lead to an explicit determination of whether a given facility should be taxed as a structure or as a building. In the statement of reasons for the judgment, the CT noted that the lawmakers should develop a new ‘autonomous’ definition of a structure for the purposes of tax acts.

What the new definition will contain

When drafting a new definition, the lawmakers may use the definition existing in the construction law, making only minor changes to it. However, this seems controversial considering that the provisions of construction law are full of ambiguities and so far the use of the definition based on them has led to hundreds of disputes between taxpayers and tax authorities.

Alternatively, the lawmakers could try introducing solutions based on cadastral tax.

A structural change to the property tax would in all likelihood increase revenue to  the state budget, something to be considered beneficial from the perspective of the lawmakers, in contrast to the perspective of taxpayers.

The Act’s new definition of a structure will also be able to directly or indirectly affect income tax laws, including, in particular, depreciation provisions.

The new definition of structure provides grounds for taxable persons to claim a refund of overpaid tax

The previously mentioned 18-month period for expiry is not insignificant. During this period, the definition of a structure will continue to be applicable and the decisions issued on its basis will remain in force.

However, the inconsistency of the provision with the Constitution provides grounds for resumption not only of tax proceedings concluded with the issuance of a final decision by the second instance authority, but also of proceedings the correctness of which, as a result of appeals, was verified by administrative courts.

Taxpayers should review these cases and, where the legal basis was Article 1a(1)(2) of the Act, request resumption of proceedings.

From the taxpayers’ point of view, it is also important that the CT judgment may be the basis for submitting requests for refunds of overpaid tax. Tax authorities and courts will have to determine whether tax collection was allowed on the basis of unconstitutional provisions.

In the case of pending proceedings, taxpayers should refer to the said decision of the Constitutional Tribunal. If the CT declares a provision unconstitutional, this should be taken into account by tax authorities and courts in pending cases.

Summary

The issue of the definition of a structure for property tax purposes has been controversial among taxpayers for years. The landmark judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal is the beginning of the road to the introduction of a new definition, which will finally resolve the dispute that has lasted for over a decade.

From the taxpayers’ perspective, however, it is important to note that the CT decision opens the way for the resumption of completed proceedings before tax authorities and administrative courts and, most importantly, may become the basis for claiming refund of excess tax paid on the basis of unconstitutional provisions.

It is thus advisable to make a property tax audit to verify whether any tax paid in recent years has been undue and whether you are therefore entitled to a refund.

Questions? Contact us

Jakub Dittmer

Jan Janukowicz


See other Tax Focus issues
Solidarity levy with a loophole

Latest Knowledge

How to structure a family foundation wisely

One of the key advantages of a family foundation is the flexibility to shape its internal structure as required. The legislature has granted the founders considerable freedom in this respect, enabling the foundation to be adapted to specific financial, family and business needs.

New rules for employing foreigners

The long-awaited Act on the Conditions for the Admissibility of Entrusting Work to Foreigners in the Republic of Poland came into force on 1 June 2025, replacing the previous legislation on employment promotion and labour market institutions.

The UDER2 draft: (theoretically) strengthened principle in dubio pro tributario

This principle, which states that doubts should be resolved in favour of the taxpayer, is set out in Article 2a of the General Tax Code and applies only in cases involving vague regulations. In practice, this leaves the tax authorities with considerable leeway for arbitrary application in proceedings where factual findings are crucial.

The Polish Deposit and Return System: a guide to the legal and tax rules

The Polish Deposit and Return System launches on 1 October. This is a real revolution for businesses, whether they are producers, importers, distributors or traders. Indeed, its implementation brings with it a number of challenges, including, perhaps less obviously, concerning VAT. Here is a brief guide to the most important issues relating to the Polish Deposit and Return System.

Act Amending the Labour Code or Poland’s response to the Equal Pay Directive

On 3 April 2025, a new draft Act Amending the Labour Code appeared on the website of the Sejm. Prepared by the Extraordinary Committee for Codification Amendments, it differs significantly from the original parliamentary draft implementing the Directive (print no. 934), the first reading of which took place on 6 February 2025. On 9 May 2025, the Sejm adopted the bill without amendments.

How a family foundation can protect itself from ‘black sheep’

Every family may unfortunately have members who can be confrontational, aggressive and uncooperative, who are in addition convinced that they are always right and that the world is always against them. They can create chaos and confusion, are a source of constant conflict or simply do not fit into the overall harmony. Sometimes we call them ‘black sheep’ because they cause difficult situations, place stress on relations or fail to meet expectations.

Key changes in tax scheme reporting (MDR)

The significant changes in the tax environment and the growing expectations for fiscal transparency have prompted the legislature to streamline the existing provisions on the system for reporting tax schemes (MDR), thereby eliminating some procedural ambiguities. According to ministerial announcements, the main aim of the amendments is to improve the readability, clarity and consistency of the reporting system and more closely align it with that in force in the wider EU.

Contact us:

Wojciech Śliż

Wojciech Śliż

Tax Advisor / Partner / Tax Law

+48 539 110 037

w.sliz@kochanski.pl

Jakub Dittmer

Jakub Dittmer

Tax Advisor / Associate / Tax Law

+48 532 423 064

j.dittmer@kochanski.pl