Team Banery

The first-year pitfall – reporting on the separate collection rate under the deposit-return system for 2025

16 March 2026 | Knowledge, News

The deposit-return system came into operation on 1 October 2025. Some businesses joined immediately, while others opted to do so at a later date. At first glance, this may seem like a mere organisational matter. In practice, however, the timing of joining the system can significantly affect the outcome of accounting for the separate collection rate in 2025.

Reporting on compliance with the obligation to achieve the collection target is made on an annual basis, and the deadline for paying the product fee (if applicable) for 2025 is 15 March 2026.

Did you join late? The system can reflect this

From the wording of the regulations, it can be inferred that, when calculating the separate collection rate, only beverage packaging placed on the market from 1 October 2025 will be taken into account.

Additionally, packaging collection can only be reported from the moment a business joins the deposit-return system.

In practice, this can mean that:

  • The collection rate is calculated taking into account the weight of packaging placed on the market since the system was launched
  • The collection of packaging reported in the system only covers the period during which the business operator participated in the system

Consequently, some packaging may contribute to the base used to calculate the collection rate even if the business was not participating in the system when the packaging was placed on the market.

This interpretation of the regulations could mean that the later a company joined the system, the lower the level of separate collection shown in its annual report.

An additional factor in the first year: unmarked containers

In practice, reporting for 2025 is further complicated by yet another factor.

The Act stipulates that packaging being part of the deposit-return system must bear an appropriate mark that also indicates the deposit amount. During the transitional period, however, the sale of existing stocks of products in unmarked containers was permitted.

This means that, in 2025, the following could be traded simultaneously:

  • Packaging bearing the deposit-return system mark
  • Packaging placed on the market earlier that does not bear such a mark

The regulations themselves do not clearly specify how to account for unmarked packaging when reporting separate collection rates. In practice, this may require a detailed analysis of how the packaging was placed on the market and its status within the deposit-return system.

It is important to note that the absence of a deposit-return system mark on a container does not determine whether the container has been placed on the market within the meaning of the regulations.

Failing to pay on time? The consequences could get worse

The statutory mechanism provides for a clear sequence of events:

  • If the required collection rate is not achieved, a product fee is payable, calculated using the following formula: M × (P_wym − P_osiąg) × S [weight x (required rate – achieved rate) x fee rate]
  • If the fee is not paid or is underpaid, the province marshal may issue a decision specifying the amount of the arrears
  • If this decision is not complied with, an additional fee of 50% of the unpaid amount may be imposed

Although the fee rates are relatively low in 2025 (e.g. PLN 0.10/kg for PET bottles and metal cans), they can amount to significant sums when dealing with large volumes of packaging. Bear in mind that these rates will increase tenfold in 2026 and fiftyfold from 2027 onwards.

The Act leaves several questions unanswered

Calculating the fee is only the first step. In practice, businesses face a number of interpretative uncertainties, including the following:

  • How to calculate the collection rate when joining the system after the start of the quarter
  • Whether and how to account for packaging placed on the market before joining the system
  • How to distinguish, in the records, between packaging covered by the system and packaging sold during the transitional period without any marking

An error in this area may result not only in additional product fee being charged, but also in administrative procedures being initiated.

2025 reporting is not the time for experiments

We have advised businesses operating under the deposit-return system since its inception – on regulatory, tax and operational matters.

For the 2025 reporting, we can assist you with various tasks, including:

  • Verifying whether a product fee is due, and if so, calculating the amount
  • Analysing the impact of the date of joining the system on collection rates
  • Assessing packaging records and system documentation
  • Correctly calculating and reporting the fee
  • Preparing recommendations for the system’s operation in future years

Would you like to find out where your company stands? Get in touch with us

Latest Knowledge

Dual-use items: how broad will the CJEU’s definition be?

A training aircraft designed for civilian purposes can also qualify as a military item. That’s a conclusion emerging from the Advocate General’s Opinion in Case C-538/25 (Flugzeugherstellerin) before the Court of Justice of the European Union. What does this mean for companies exporting goods from the EU?

Workplace harassment and discrimination: new regulations for employers

The Sejm has passed an amendment to the Labour Code concerning workplace harassment and discrimination. The changes introduce a broader definition of the concept itself, new forms of harassment, clearer definitions of what constitutes, for example, sexual harassment, and new rules governing the handling of such cases, including the reversal of the burden of proof, higher compensation awards, and the jurisdiction of district courts. The provisions will enter into force on 5 November 2026. We examine what will change and how much time remains to adapt company documents, policies, and the organisation as a whole.

ESG Roadmap. How to identify which regulations apply to your business and build a strategy

As we know, ESG in business is a roadmap made up of numerous obligations arising from different regulatory frameworks. That is why the right question is not “how do I meet all the requirements?” but rather “which of them apply to my business?”. This is a crucial distinction. We explain how to correctly diagnose your regulatory profile and build an effective ESG strategy – one that actually works and gives you a competitive edge.

Announcement of Income Tax Reform

On 19 August, during a press conference, the Prime Minister announced a package of tax changes planned for next year. According to the announcement, the reform is intended, on the one hand, to ease the burden on the middle class and, on the other, to shift a greater fiscal burden onto the wealthiest individuals and the largest companies. We take a look at the proposals included in the announced package and explain what they might mean for taxpayers.

Family foundations and the tax authorities: what draft bill UD447 proposes and why this is not the end of the troubles

Family foundations were intended to provide entrepreneurs with a stable framework for intergenerational wealth management. Yet not even four years have passed since the first such foundations were established, and the rules governing their taxation are set to be changed once again. This is because the scale of interest and the practical problems uncovered have overwhelmed the drafters of the legislation, as best illustrated by the figures – 927 applications for individual tax rulings and 77 opinions issued from the Head of the National Revenue Administration. This does not, however, mean that family foundations are being used on a massive scale for aggressive tax optimisation. A significant proportion of the queries concerned simply how to correctly apply the complex regulations.

Banking today and tomorrow | Financial sector overview | August 2026

Poland’s banking sector has reacted with concern to recent remarks by Katarzyna Pełczyńska-Nałęcz, the Minister of Development Funds and Regional Policy, who announced plans to put forward a proposal for a further increase in CIT levied on banks. The Minister’s reasoning, however, rests on a flawed conflation of the sector’s liquidity with its profitability, revealing a fundamental misunderstanding of how the banking sector operates and how its financial health is assessed. What is more, it feeds into a worrying trend of replacing substantive debate with simplistic, populist messaging which may be politically appealing but is not underpinned by either facts or economic analysis.

NIS2 and the National Cybersecurity System Act in transport: what you need to do before October 2026

The amended Act on the National Cybersecurity System (UKSC) has been in force since 3 April 2026. For transport sector undertakings, this means a specific compliance timeline, including an obligation to register with the National Cybersecurity System (KSC) registry by 3 October 2026. Failure to do so may result in substantial financial penalties, coupled with the risk of personal liability for senior management. Not every undertaking, however, automatically falls within the scope of the new regime. Read on to find out whether your organisation is affected and what you need to do before the deadline for preparation.

Family foundations: the government has done the maths and presented the bill

Three years. That’s how long we’ve been waiting for what the Council of Ministers had seen in the data from the outset – and has now disclosed in its review of the Family Foundation Act. The document not only diagnoses the problems, but also previews substantial changes to rules that founders and their advisers treated as settled and stable. And therein lies a problem that goes far beyond tax matters. If the rules of the game are changed while the game is being played, there can be neither planning stability nor trust in the law. It is no coincidence that one of the greatest concerns among entrepreneurs considering setting up a foundation is not the level of taxation, but the stability of the legal framework – which today is once again being called into question.