Who Can Benefit from “Small ZUS Plus”?

Since February 1, 2020, entrepreneurs who ran a business for at least 60 calendar days in the previous calendar year and whose income in the year preceding the application did not exceed PLN 120,000.00, can benefit from the “Small ZUS Plus” program and pay reduced social security contributions.

Small ZUS Plus is undoubtedly an attractive support option for small business owners, but not everyone is eligible. For instance, if you benefited from the Small ZUS or Small ZUS Plus for a total of 36 months within 60 months of running your business, you are no longer eligible. Similarly, if you qualify to pay reduced contributions based on 30% of the minimum wage, you also cannot take advantage of Small ZUS Plus.

Another limitation relates to your tax settlement method. If you use a flat-rate tax card and are simultaneously exempt from VAT, you are not required to file PIT or VAT declarations. As a result, ZUS lacks the necessary data to verify the correctness of your contribution base, which excludes you from the Small ZUS Plus program.

If you operate a business as a partner in a general partnership or perform the same tasks you previously did as an employee for the same employer, you are also not eligible. Likewise, if you are insured due to another non-agricultural activity, you’ll need to look for other solutions.

It’s also worth noting that creators, artists, freelancers, partners in general partnerships, limited partnerships, partnerships, or sole shareholders of limited liability companies, as well as individuals running public or private schools, kindergartens, and other educational institutions, are not eligible for the Small ZUS Plus program.

How Long Can You Use Small ZUS Plus?

Small ZUS Plus is a great way to lower the cost of doing business, but it’s important to understand the time limits. The rules are clear: reduced social security contributions can be used for a maximum of 36 months within 60 calendar months of running a business.

What does this mean in practice? For a total of 36 months (three years), an entrepreneur can pay lower contributions. However, this period must be spread over five years (60 months). Importantly, months during which you used the original Small ZUS program also count toward these 36 months.

For example, if you benefited from Small ZUS for 12 months, you have 24 months left to use Small ZUS Plus. After using the full 36 months of discounted contributions, you must pay full rates for the remaining months within the five-year period.

Small ZUS Plus in Court?

The program, which was intended to help entrepreneurs, has led to disputes with ZUS regarding how long a break should last before an entrepreneur can use the program again. Business owners who used Small ZUS Plus between 2019 and 2021 expected to requalify for lower contributions in 2024. However, ZUS believed that the right to reapply wouldn’t be restored until 2025—after three full years of paying full contributions.

When ZUS started issuing unfavorable decisions, denying access to Small ZUS Plus from January 1, 2024, the Ombudsman for Small and Medium Enterprises intervened, arguing that the legislator’s intention was to require only a two-year break. The Ombudsman began appealing such decisions to court.

A breakthrough came on June 27, 2024, when the District Court in Gorzów Wielkopolski issued the first ruling in favor of entrepreneurs. The court agreed with the Ombudsman’s arguments and granted the entrepreneur the right to Small ZUS Plus starting January 1, 2024. In its justification, the court emphasized that the law should be interpreted in line with the legislator’s intent, which was to allow three years of relief within five-year periods. The court also cited Article 11 of the Entrepreneurs’ Law, which mandates authorities to interpret provisions in a business-friendly manner and resolve ambiguities in favor of entrepreneurs.

For entrepreneurs who have received unfavorable interpretations from ZUS, this opens the door to paying reduced contributions sooner. If you need assistance with issues related to the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) or want to learn more about available contribution preferences, feel free to contact us remotely: https://atl-law.pl/prawo-pracy-sprawy-zus/

Facilitating Access to Economic Information

On July 9, 2024, the Council of Ministers adopted a draft act amending the Act on the Provision of Economic Information and Exchange of Economic Data, submitted by the Minister of Development and Technology. The amendment aims to simplify the regulations concerning the provision and exchange of economic information, as well as to regulate the activities of economic information bureaus – entities that collect, store, and share data on unreliable debtors. There are currently four economic information bureaus in Poland: BIG InfoMonitor S.A., Krajowe Biuro Informacji Gospodarczej S.A., Krajowy Rejestr Długów BIG, and ERIF Biuro Informacji Gospodarczej S.A.

What will change?

  The main changes to be introduced include:

• The obligation for economic information bureaus to publish their service price lists on their websites.
• Bureaus will be required to enter into the inquiry register information about the entity to whom economic information was disclosed.
• The requirement to register information about the recipient of the disclosed economic data in the inquiry register.
• The extension of the range of information that may be submitted to the economic information bureau to include the electronic delivery address of a non-consumer entity.
• The obligation to provide the representative’s details in the application, if the request for disclosure is made via, for example, a proxy.
• The possibility of access to economic information and the inquiry register data for entities such as the police and Border Guard.

When can we expect the changes?

According to the draft act, the new regulations are to enter into force 30 days after their publication in the Journal of Laws, except for the obligation to notify the bureau about access to economic information by another entity and to register that information in the inquiry register, which will take effect six months after the publication date. The Ministry plans to implement the new measures later this year.

Social media have long become an inseparable part of our lives. The boundary between private and professional life is becoming increasingly blurred: we post, comment, share photos, and express opinions daily. However, we do not always realize that our online activity can impact our careers. Could an innocent Facebook post or a comment on LinkedIn lead to dismissal? What rights do employers have when it comes to monitoring employees’ social media activity? When can online posts result in job loss, and how can one protect themselves from such situations without risking their career?

Limits of freedom of speech – where does employee responsibility lie?

 First and foremost, it should be noted that everyone, including employees, has the right to freedom of expression. However, one must remember that although everyone has the right to express their views, such statements cannot violate legal provisions or infringe on the personal rights of others.
According to Article 100 of the Polish Labour Code, an employee is obliged to perform their work conscientiously and diligently and to follow the instructions of superiors, provided that these are not contrary to legal regulations or the employment contract. In particular, an employee must observe principles of social coexistence in the workplace. It is also important that the employee protects company property and maintains the confidentiality of any information that could harm the employer, and takes care of the employer’s best interests, including its brand, trademark, reputation, and image.

It is worth emphasizing that commenting on work-related issues is not, in itself, a violation of the law – but it is easy to cross the line between freedom of speech and damaging the employer’s good name. The problem arises when comments are offensive, include confidential information, or are untrue. In such cases, even if the posts are published outside of working hours and offsite, they can still negatively impact the employee and result in serious consequences.

Dismissal is not the only consequence

When an employee crosses the line of decency on the Internet, the consequences can extend far beyond a warning or reprimand. Of course, in cases of serious violations, employers may choose to terminate the employment contract, either with notice or under Article 52 of the Labour Code. But that may only be the beginning of problems for the employee, whose actions could have broad and serious repercussions.
Publishing false information about an employer online may result in liability for violating the company’s personal rights. The employee could also face criminal liability for defamation or insult. Balancing the right of employees to express themselves with the need to protect a company’s interests is a real challenge for employers. Given the increasingly blurred lines between personal and professional life, it is essential to carefully consider all possible consequences. If you need support with employment law issues or would like to learn about available legal solutions, feel free to contact us remotely:
https://atl-law.pl/prawo-pracy-sprawy-zus/

In the era of technology and digitalization, an employee’s image can become one of the most important marketing tools for a company. Publishing photos or videos from corporate events, training sessions, or team-building trips has become a daily practice. However, does an employer always need to ask for consent to share such materials? The answer to this question may be crucial for any organization.

Consent is not always required

According to Article 81 of the Copyright Act, distributing a person’s image requires their consent – but there are certain exceptions. If a person is widely known and their image was taken in connection with performing public duties, consent is not required. Similarly, if an employee appears only in the background of a photo from a company event, and the main focus of the image is, for example, the room’s decor, no consent is needed for publication. However, when a photo focuses on employees’ faces, consent generally becomes necessary.
The matter of using an image in internal company systems, such as the intranet, differs from publishing photos on social media. In the case of publication within the internal communication network, the group of recipients is limited exclusively to the company’s employees. In such cases, the employer does not need to obtain separate consent for image publication, although it must be remembered that the employee has the right to object, in accordance with Article 21(1) of the GDPR.

When is consent necessary?

In all other cases, it should be assumed that obtaining the employee’s consent is necessary. This consent must be voluntary and precise – it should include the employee’s personal data, the name of the company, the form of the image, the duration of the consent, and the place of its distribution. It is recommended that the consent be expressed in writing, which will facilitate proof of its existence if needed – and it should be stored in the employee’s personnel file. The consent to use the employee’s image may be withdrawn at any time, but it can only apply to future publications.
It must not be forgotten that every situation involving the distribution of an employee’s image may have unique circumstances and may require an individual approach. If you have any questions or doubts, please contact our Law Firm. You can count on comprehensive support and full commitment at every stage of handling your case.

Personal Income Tax (PIT)

Value-Added Tax (VAT)

Summary

According to Article 152 of the Labour Code, an employee is entitled to an annual, uninterrupted, paid holiday leave. Furthermore, Article 161 of the same Act imposes on the employer the obligation to grant the employee leave in the calendar year in which the right to it was acquired. In practice, this means that the employee has the right to rest, and the employer is obliged to enable the employee to take the entitled leave at the agreed time. But what should be done if a long-planned holiday trip meets with the employer’s decision to postpone it?

Postponement of leave is possible, provided it is justified

Postponing the leave at the employer’s initiative is possible, but only under certain exceptions. Article 164 § 2 of the Labour Code states that postponement of the leave is permissible due to the employer’s special needs if the employee’s absence would cause serious disruption to the course of work. However, the legislator does not specify what constitutes "serious disruption to the course of work," which allows some flexibility, but not unlimited discretion. "Serious disruption to the course of work" must be genuinely justified and cannot be used as a pretext for unjustified changes to the leave schedule. Postponement of leave should be motivated, in particular, by urgent needs of the employer and the risk of improper functioning of the establishment due to the employee’s absence caused by, for example: urgent technical problems that may affect the continuity of the company’s work, the necessity to fulfil a contract, emergency situations impacting the company’s operations requiring immediate response, an audit conducted by the Supreme Audit Office or other authorities.
The employer should notify the employee of the decision as soon as possible, i.e. immediately after learning about the situation justifying the postponement of the leave.

Can the employee refuse the postponement of leave?

The employee has no right to contest the employer’s decision to postpone leave if it is justified. Articles 100 § 1 and § 2 point 4 of the Labour Code oblige the employee to comply with the work regulations and to care for the company’s welfare. This means that in justified cases the employee must adapt to the new leave date, which should be set for a later time but still within the same calendar year or by the end of September of the following year.
 

Reimbursement of leave costs

It is in vain to look for provisions on reimbursement of leave costs in the event that the employer decides to postpone the employee’s leave – the legislator does not regulate this issue in any way, although expenses incurred by the employee related to the leave are often substantial sums that cannot always be recovered.
In the literature, it is indicated that in such cases the regulation of Article 167 § 2 of the Labour Code, used in the context of recalling an employee from leave, should be applied. Thus, it should be assumed that the employer ought to cover costs incurred by the employee directly related to the recall from leave, and the amount must be proven by the employee.

Postponement of leave is also an obligation

Postponing an employee’s leave is not only a right but also an obligation of the employer. Article 165 of the Labour Code provides that the employer is obliged to postpone the leave to a later date if the employee cannot start the leave at the agreed time for justified reasons of absence from work, in particular due to:

• Temporary incapacity for work due to illness;
• Isolation related to an infectious disease;
• Calling up for military exercises within the passive reserve, attendance for territorial military service on a rotational basis, or active reserve service, for up to 3 months;
• Maternity leave.

The above list is open, which means that in each case of justified employee absence preventing timely leave commencement, the employer is obliged to postpone the leave.
 

Summary

Postponement of leave by the employer is possible only in cases of real, justified company needs. The employer must comply with the law and properly inform the employee about any changes. The employee, in turn, has the right to be granted a new leave date and compensation for any costs incurred due to the cancellation of leave caused by the employer’s decision.
Knowledge of the regulations and appropriate conduct in such situations can help maintain a balance between employees’ rights and employers’ needs. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact our Law Firm. You can count on comprehensive service and full commitment at every stage of handling your case.

On 24 June 2024, the Act on the Protection of Whistleblowers dated 14 June 2024 was published in the Journal of Laws. This Act implements the provisions of the Directive of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law, commonly referred to as the Whistleblowing Protection Directive. The provisions of the Act on the Protection of Whistleblowers will mostly come into force on 25 September 2024, with the exception of the regulations concerning external reports, which will apply three months later, i.e. from 25 December 2024. The new regulation brings new obligations and challenges for private companies and public entities. The Act on the Protection of Whistleblowers regulates, among other things: the conditions for granting protection to whistleblowers reporting or publicly disclosing information about breaches of law, measures for the protection of whistleblowers reporting or publicly disclosing information about breaches of law, and the rules for establishing an internal procedure for reporting information about breaches of law and taking follow-up actions.

Who is a whistleblower?

According to Article 4 of the Act on the Protection of Whistleblowers, a whistleblower is a natural person who reports or publicly discloses information about a breach of Union law obtained in a work-related context. This may include, among others, an employee, temporary worker, proxy, shareholder or partner, or a person performing work under a basis other than an employment relationship, including under a civil law contract. The regulations also apply when a person makes a relevant report or disclosure of information about a breach of law obtained in connection with work before the commencement of an employment relationship or other legal relationship forming the basis for the provision of work or services or holding a position within a legal entity or on behalf of that entity, or performing service in a legal entity, or even after the termination of such relationships.

What breaches of law can be reported?

Article 3(1) of the Act on the Protection of Whistleblowers states that a breach of law is an act or omission contrary to the law or intended to circumvent the law, concerning corruption, public procurement, services, products and financial markets, anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing, product safety and compliance with requirements, transport safety, environmental protection, radiological protection and nuclear safety, food and feed safety, animal health and welfare, public health, consumer protection, privacy and personal data protection, security of network and information systems, financial interests of the State Treasury of the Republic of Poland, local government units and the European Union, the internal market of the European Union, including public law rules on competition and state aid, and taxation of legal persons, constitutional freedoms and human and citizen rights — occurring in relations of the individual with public authorities and unrelated to the areas listed above. Additionally, it is worth noting that a legal entity may, within the framework of the internal reporting procedure, create the possibility of reporting information about breaches related to internal regulations or ethical standards established by the legal entity based on generally applicable law and consistent with it.
The provisions of the Act on the Protection of Whistleblowers shall not apply to information covered by the provisions on classified information and other information that may not be disclosed under generally applicable law for reasons of public security, professional secrecy of medical and legal professions, judicial deliberation secrecy, and criminal proceedings — with respect to secrecy of preparatory proceedings and court hearings conducted in camera.

Ways of reporting breaches

The regulation provides three possible ways of reporting breaches of law. After becoming aware of breaches covered by the scope of the Act, a whistleblower may report them through internal procedure, external procedure, or public disclosure. In the case of internal reporting, the whistleblower informs the legal entity at which they are employed or with which they have other remuneration-based relations. External reporting consists of directing the information to a public authority or the Commissioner for Human Rights. As a last resort, after meeting the conditions set out in the Act, the whistleblower may choose public disclosure. In this case, the whistleblower makes the information about the breach publicly known, bypassing the other reporting channels.

New obligations arising from the Act on the Protection of Whistleblowers

The new regulation imposes the obligation on certain private and public entities to develop and implement an internal procedure. This obligation applies to private and public entities employing at least 50 persons on 1 January or 1 July of a given year. This threshold includes not only employees under employment contracts but also other persons performing remunerated work under other bases, including contracts of mandate. The threshold does not apply to legal entities operating in the fields of services, products and financial markets, anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing, transport safety, and environmental protection covered by the relevant EU legislation. In such cases, regardless of the number of persons performing remunerated work, the entity must have an internal procedure. Other private entities may optionally develop and introduce a suitable whistleblowing process. When preparing and implementing the appropriate procedures, it is advisable to seek the assistance of a legal firm that can help draft the necessary documents and implement the procedure in compliance with the law, while addressing practical aspects important for every entrepreneur.
Regarding legal entities that are local government units, the obligations of the legal entity will be fulfilled by the organisational units of the local government units. It is worth noting that local government units will have the right to establish a joint internal reporting procedure within a shared service, provided that its distinctiveness and independence from the procedure for receiving external reports and taking follow-up actions is ensured. Organisational units of a municipality or county with fewer than 10,000 inhabitants will not be required to establish an internal procedure. In their case, the legislator has provided for voluntariness.

Since 1 January 2016, Polish tax law has offered entrepreneurs an extremely attractive opportunity – a research and development (R&D) relief. This relief allows an additional deduction of certain expenses incurred on R&D activities from the tax base, which can bring significant financial benefits and support the growth of the company. Nevertheless, the rules for claiming this relief raise many questions among taxpayers. Determining whether your company is entitled to this relief can be crucial for the innovativeness and tax optimisation of your enterprise.

What is the R&D relief?

The R&D relief is a tool intended to be available to every entrepreneur regardless of the company size, provided that they conduct research and development activities. Income from business activity must be taxed either under the progressive tax scale or the flat tax rate.
Detailed information about the R&D relief is set out in Article 26e of the Personal Income Tax Act (PIT) and Article 18d of the Corporate Income Tax Act (CIT). It is assumed that a taxpayer earning income other than from capital gains deducts from the tax base, determined pursuant to Article 26(1) or Article 30c(2) of the PIT Act, the costs incurred on R&D activities, hereinafter referred to as “qualified costs,” provided that the deduction amount in the tax year does not exceed the amount of income obtained by the taxpayer from the source specified in Article 10(1)(3) of the PIT Act.

According to the law, qualified costs include, among others:

• Employee salaries related to R&D activities and associated social security contributions, as well as remuneration under commission contracts or contracts for specific work related to R&D activities, together with related social contributions;
• Expenditures on the purchase of materials and raw materials directly related to conducted R&D activities – including, according to the latest interpretation of the Director of the National Tax Information (KIS), also expenses on office supplies and computer equipment;
• Expenditures on expert opinions, assessments, advisory services, and equivalent services provided or performed under contract by entities referred to in the higher education and science legislation, as well as on acquiring results of research conducted by them for R&D purposes;
• Expenditures on paid use of scientific research equipment used exclusively in conducted R&D activities – provided such use does not arise from a contract concluded with an entity related to the taxpayer;
• Expenditures on purchasing services of using scientific research equipment exclusively for R&D purposes – provided such purchase does not arise from a contract concluded with an entity related to the taxpayer;
• Costs of obtaining and maintaining patents, utility model protection rights, industrial design rights incurred for:

• • Preparation of application documentation and submitting applications to the Patent Office of the Republic of Poland or an appropriate foreign authority, including costs of required foreign language translations;
  • Proceedings conducted by the Patent Office of the Republic of Poland or an appropriate foreign authority, incurred from the moment of application submission to these authorities, especially official fees and legal representation and litigation costs;
  • Refuting objections concerning failure to meet conditions required to obtain a patent, utility model protection right, or industrial design registration, both in the application procedure and afterwards, especially costs of legal representation and litigation, both at the Patent Office of the Republic of Poland and the relevant foreign authority;
  • Periodic fees, renewal fees, translations, and carrying out other necessary actions to grant or maintain the validity of the patent, utility model protection right, and industrial design registration, including costs of validation of the European patent.

Documenting the entitlement to the relief

As follows from the Regulation of the Minister of Finance, taxpayers using the R&D relief must separately identify R&D activity costs in their revenue and expense ledger or accounting books.
If you maintain a tax revenue and expense ledger, you should record the R&D costs in column 16. After the end of the year, you need to sum these costs. It is important to record all R&D activity costs, regardless of the part that will be deducted from the tax base.

Summary

Using the R&D relief can significantly reduce tax liabilities and translate into real savings that can be reinvested in the further development of the company. Innovative projects supported by the R&D relief may bring a competitive advantage and open new business opportunities.
If you have any questions regarding tax matters, please feel free to contact us, including remotely: https://atl-law.pl/prawo-podatkowe.

23 July 2024, the Constitutional Tribunal issued a highly significant ruling (case ref. K13/20), in which it declared that the provisions imposing on tax advisors the obligation to report tax schemes are unconstitutional.

These provisions concern regulations effective from 1 January 2019 within the Tax Ordinance Act, implementing EU legislation, namely the DAC6 directive, which imposes on advisors the duty to report tax schemes to the Head of the National Revenue Administration.

The Tribunal sided with the argumentation of the National Council of Tax Advisors, which filed a complaint in this matter, indicating that these regulations violate the professional secrecy of tax advisors and fail to meet the requirements arising from Articles 2 and 17(1), as well as Articles 49 and 51(2) in connection with Articles 31(3) and 47 of the Constitution.

The provisions regarding the reporting of tax schemes were deemed imprecise and not compliant with the principle of legal certainty, which contradicts Article 2 of the Constitution. The principle of legal certainty requires that provisions be clear, precise, and understandable, enabling their correct application and predictability for citizens. In the case of tax schemes, the lack of unambiguous definitions and clear criteria led to legal uncertainty and difficulties in their application.

According to Article 17(1) of the Constitution, tax advisors are to act in the interest of protecting the public good as well as the welfare and security of their clients. The obligation to report tax schemes placed advisors in a conflict of interest situation, forcing them to choose between loyalty to the client and duties towards tax authorities. The Tribunal held that such provisions prevent tax advisors from effectively performing their professional duties and protecting their clients’ interests.

Furthermore, the Constitutional Tribunal clearly emphasised that any explanations, interpretations, or informational documents issued by the government administration cannot replace the legal text, because, pursuant to Article 217 of the Constitution, the taxpayer has the right to clearly determine their tax obligations directly on the basis of the law, and not based on documents that are not official sources of law. The Tribunal made it clear that provisions must be clear and precise, and any attempts to “fix” them through governmental explanations are insufficient.

The Constitutional Tribunal’s ruling in case K13/20 represents an important step towards protecting civil rights and ensuring that tax law provisions comply with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. Restoring full professional secrecy for tax advisors not only increases client trust but also enables advisors to act more effectively in protecting public and private interests.

It should, however, be emphasised that the Tribunal’s verdict does not imply the necessity to eliminate all provisions regarding the reporting of tax schemes.

Every entrepreneur sooner or later faces the dilemma of which expenses can be classified as tax-deductible costs. Inexperienced taxpayers often do not know whether and how to allocate specific costs. When an entrepreneur reaches for their wallet to pay for coffee and biscuits for employees or a company event, the natural question arises: can these expenses be included as business costs? The answer, as is often the case in tax law, is: “it depends”. It should be remembered that not every purchase will necessarily be treated by the tax authorities as a business-justified expense. So, is it worth the risk, and where is the line between a cost and a whim?

What are tax-deductible costs?

Referring to the regulations, we can establish that according to Article 22 of the PIT Act, tax-deductible costs are expenses incurred to generate income or to maintain or secure the source of income. The legislator also points out expenses that do not constitute tax-deductible costs – among these are, inter alia:

• Purchase of land – buying land is not a deductible cost;
• Value of own work – work performed by the owner or their family is not a deductible cost;
• Full depreciation of an expensive car – depreciation of a car’s value exceeding PLN 150,000 (or PLN 225,000 for electric vehicles) is not a deductible cost;
• Donations – donations made are not deductible costs, except for food donated for charitable purposes;
• Fines and penalties – imposed fines or penalties are not deductible costs.

In theory, this sounds simple – after all, the legislator clearly indicated what constitutes a tax-deductible cost and what does not. Unfortunately, in practice, the matter becomes more complicated. Recognising a given expense as a tax-deductible cost may require proper justification in case of an audit, and when it comes to food products, the matter is by no means straightforward.
 

Food purchases as business costs – when is it possible?

Purchasing food products can be recognised as a tax-deductible cost, but only in specific situations. The key factor here is how these products are used in the business activity.
If an entrepreneur provides food products such as water, tea, coffee, etc. for their employees during work, this can be recognised as a tax-deductible cost. This results, among others, from health and safety regulations, which indicate that the employer is obliged to provide all employees with drinking water or other beverages during working hours, and since this is an obligation, expenses related to it should constitute tax-deductible costs.

Unfortunately, expenses on food products may be regarded as representation expenses, i.e., expenses that do not constitute tax-deductible costs. If the purchased products are aimed at improving the company’s image (e.g., an elaborate reception at a meeting), tax authorities may, as practice shows, challenge their classification as deductible costs.

This position has also been repeatedly emphasised by the Director of the National Tax Information. For instance, in a letter this year, it was indicated that:
“Recognition of a given expense as a tax-deductible cost is possible only when it is beyond all doubt, based on properly and reliably documented events, that it is a purposeful and rationally justified expense… Among the expenses not recognised as tax-deductible costs, the legislator listed… representation costs, in particular those incurred for catering services, purchase of food and beverages, including alcoholic beverages… The concept of representation does not include those activities undertaken in relation to one’s own employees… providing food products limits breaks for meal preparation, allowing employees to focus on their assigned tasks. Shared consumption supports integration, exchange of ideas, and creation of new solutions. It improves relationships within the company. Providing snacks causes employees to feel valued and that they are an important link in the company’s structure. This strengthens their attachment to the company. Benefits aim to raise work standards and improve the atmosphere in the office. As a result, their productivity and efficiency increase. Employees are more motivated, work faster and better. Providing employees with food products is currently a common practice in the labour market, encouraging them to start and continue working for a given employer… The applicant is entitled to include the expenses for the purchase of the food products indicated in the application (various snacks and non-alcoholic beverages, e.g. coffee, tea, juices, nuts, pretzels, biscuits, milk, water, sugar), which are provided at the company’s premises to employees during the performance of tasks. These expenses do not constitute representation costs.”

Food purchases and catering business

The situation is different if you run a business related to catering, gastronomy, or trading in food products. In such cases, purchasing food products is directly connected with the conducted activity and can be included as tax-deductible costs without major problems. However, it is important to precisely document which products were purchased and how they were used.
 

Summary

Purchasing food products can be included as tax-deductible costs, but only in specific situations and with appropriate justification. It is worth remembering to maintain proper documentation and be prepared for possible questions from tax authorities. As always, the devil is in the details, and each situation requires individual analysis.