Month: June 2026

Polish Investment Zone Reform 2026

Posted on by kancelaria

Draft amendments to the Act on Supporting New Investments – what foreign investors should know

 

Legislative status – as of June 2026

This guide discusses a draft amendment to the Polish Act on Supporting New Investments. Its assumptions have been entered in the Government’s List of Legislative and Programme Work, and the proposed direction was presented publicly in June 2026. These are proposed, not binding, rules.

The final shape of the legislation – and indeed whether it enters into force at all – depends on the course of the legislative process. Until the act is promulgated in the Journal of Laws, the current legal framework described below remains in force.

Why this matters for foreign investors

For an inbound investor, the Polish Investment Zone (PSI) is the single most important tax incentive in the country: a corporate or personal income tax exemption granted by a so-called decision on support, in exchange for carrying out a qualifying investment of a defined value and creating a declared number of jobs. Unlike the earlier special economic zone (SEZ) model, the PSI exemption is available across the entire territory of Poland rather than within demarcated areas only.

In June 2026 the government outlined a broad amendment to the regime. Three features make it directly relevant to capital allocation decisions. First, the maximum period of the support decision is to be extended, lengthening the horizon over which the exemption can be used. Second, that extension interacts with the global minimum tax, potentially preserving the real value of the incentive for multinational groups. Third, a new mandatory tax-authority opinion will apply to the largest projects, adding a procedural step that must be planned for. The remainder of this guide explains the current regime, then walks through what is set to change.

The PSI in brief – the regime as it stands

Support for a new investment is granted, under Article 3 of the Act on Supporting New Investments of 10 May 2018 (consolidated text: Journal of Laws of 2023, item 74, as amended), in the form of an income tax exemption. For corporate taxpayers the legal basis is Article 17(1)(34a) of the CIT Act; for individuals carrying on business activity, Article 21(1)(63b) of the PIT Act. The exemption covers income from the business activity specified in the support decision, carried out within the area indicated in that decision, up to the ceiling of available State aid.

Support decisions are issued, on behalf of the minister responsible for the economy, by the area manager – historically the companies managing the special economic zones. Today a decision runs for ten, twelve or fifteen years, depending on the regional aid intensity applicable to the location. The amount of aid is calculated as the product of the maximum aid intensity for the region and either the eligible costs of the new investment or the two-year labour costs of newly employed staff.

The instrument has a strong track record. Between September 2018 and 31 December 2025, roughly 3,700 support decisions were issued, covering a declared investment value of around PLN 154.4 billion and close to 55,570 new jobs. Polish small and medium-sized enterprises accounted for about 72 percent of the projects, confirming that the regime reaches well beyond large multinationals.

What the draft changes

Extension of the support-decision period and the global minimum tax

The most consequential proposal is to extend the maximum period of a support decision to twenty years, against the current ceiling of fifteen. A longer horizon increases certainty across the full life cycle of an investment and helps absorb capital outlays in long-payback projects typical of manufacturing and logistics.

The extension carries particular weight under the OECD Pillar Two global minimum tax (the top-up tax, implemented in part through the QDMTT mechanism). The structure of that levy can mean that benefiting from PSI-style exemptions triggers a top-up tax payable outside Poland by international groups. Spreading the same support over a longer period lowers its annual intensity and may therefore soften the top-up effect, helping to preserve the real value of the incentive for groups within scope of minimum taxation. For multinational investors, this is the change most likely to alter the post-tax economics of a Polish project.

A mandatory opinion from the Head of the National Revenue Administration

A genuinely new feature is an opinion issued by the Head of the National Revenue Administration (KAS) on a new investment. The opinion is to address the subject matter of the business activity connected with the investment and the area where it is to be carried out, to the extent these bear on the scope of the tax exemption. Under the assumptions, the opinion will be mandatory where the maximum permissible amount of State aid for an investor is to exceed PLN 25 million.

The mechanism strengthens fiscal oversight before a decision is issued and, in the drafters’ intention, gives the taxpayer certainty as to how the exempt activity and its location will be understood. In practice it adds a procedural stage to large projects. Investors should build this step into their timelines and ensure that the description of the activity and the investment area is consistent across the application, the project documentation and the transfer pricing policy – consistency that matters most where the Polish entity performs functions for related parties within a group.

Express treatment of reinvestments

The draft expressly confirms the right to exempt income generated by the expansion of existing plants – so-called reinvestments. The eligibility of reinvestments has, to date, raised interpretive doubts, even though reinvestments feature in roughly 70 percent of the support decisions issued. A statutory confirmation materially improves the tax certainty of businesses scaling capacity within facilities that are already operating.

Digitalisation through the ePSI platform

The draft provides for an Electronic Platform of the Polish Investment Zone, operating under the working name ePSI. It is to allow applications, correspondence with the authority and the issuing, amendment and expiry of decisions to be handled electronically. The system is also expected to verify simple formal errors automatically – a frequent cause of delay to date – and to support monitoring of the effects of granted support. For investors running parallel projects across several locations, the resulting standardisation of documentary requirements is a practical benefit.

A new definition of the employment level

The draft introduces a new definition of the employment level. To date the concept has been read – including in the case law of the Supreme Administrative Court – not only as a headcount but also in temporal terms, as an average workforce maintained over a given period. The proposed provision is to state unambiguously that the employment level is the number of employees engaged at the establishment where the new investment is located. The change simplifies verification of the commitments under a support decision, but obliges investors to revisit how they declare and monitor employment, particularly in multi-site structures and where flexible forms of engagement are used.

Defining the area manager after the zones expire

The reform is prompted by the expiry of the Special Economic Zones Act of 20 October 1994, which ceases to have effect on 31 December 2026. On that date the existing area managers would lose their legal basis to act. The draft adds an autonomous definition of the area manager to the Act on Supporting New Investments and transfers to it the competences to service investors and to issue, amend and monitor support decisions – securing institutional continuity for investors after the zones are wound down.

Foreign investor considerations

On balance, the proposed changes are favourable to inbound investors. The longer decision period and its link to the global minimum tax address one of the principal tax risks faced by multinational groups using Polish incentives, while digitalisation and the express treatment of reinvestments improve the predictability of the investment process.

At the same time, the mandatory KAS opinion for projects with aid exceeding PLN 25 million means that the largest foreign investments will undergo additional, prior scrutiny by the revenue administration. This step should be reflected in project timelines, and the description of the activity and investment area should be coherent across all documentation. Investors should also recall that zone-exempt income is subject to separate accounting from other preferences – including the R&D relief and the IP Box – requiring careful segregation of the costs and revenues of exempt and taxable activity. The reform does not change this principle; it tidies the regulatory environment in which it operates.

Current regime versus proposed rules – at a glance

The table below contrasts the key elements of the instrument as it stands with the shape suggested by the draft assumptions. The right-hand column should be read subject to its non-binding, draft character.

Area Current regime Proposed rule
Application process Paper / mixed, fragmented Electronic ePSI platform, automated error checks
Support-decision period 10, 12 or 15 years Extended up to 20 years
Global minimum tax No mitigation of effect Longer period lowers annual aid intensity
Employment level Headcount-and-time reading (case law) Headcount at the investment establishment
Fiscal oversight No prior KAS opinion Mandatory KAS opinion where aid > PLN 25m
Reinvestments Eligibility uncertain Right to exemption stated expressly
Area manager Based on the SEZ Act Autonomous definition in the WNI Act

Timeline and entry into force

Under the assumptions, the draft is to be adopted by the Council of Ministers in the second or third quarter of 2026. Allowing for the usual course of the legislative process, the tax measures could apply to income tax settlements for periods beginning on or after 1 January 2027, while non-tax elements – including the operational aspects of the ePSI platform and the provisions regularising the status of area managers – could enter into force earlier.

These are projections based on published assumptions. The full text of the draft, its final wording and the effective dates of individual measures remain dependent on further legislative work. Investors planning to apply for support decisions in 2026 should monitor the progress of the work and factor in the possibility that the rules change while a procedure is pending.

Conclusions and practical recommendations

The proposed PSI reform points in an investor-friendly direction: it digitalises and accelerates the procedure, lengthens the horizon of the exemption, eases the tension between zone aid and the global minimum tax, and removes a significant interpretive doubt around reinvestments. In parallel, it introduces a new oversight stage in the form of the mandatory KAS opinion for the largest projects.

Investors holding a support decision, or planning new projects, should already assess the impact of the proposed changes on their strategy – in particular the time horizon of the investment, the way employment is declared, and the consistency of the documentation that determines the scope of the exemption. Decisions to commence or pause application proceedings in 2026 are best taken in light of the current state of legislative work, with the risk of change in mind. Given the draft character of the measures discussed, we recommend verifying the legal position immediately before any investment decision.

Editorial note

This guide reflects the amendment assumptions known as of June 2026 and deliberately omits details whose wording has not yet been finalised – including the precise scope of transitional rules for decisions issued before the reform takes effect, the technical parameters of the ePSI platform, and any regional differentiation of the maximum decision period.

It also does not cover the detailed rules for calculating the State aid ceiling, the regional aid intensity applicable in individual voivodeships, or the interaction between the zone exemption and the R&D relief and IP Box, all of which call for separate, case-specific analysis. For specific matters, please contact us.

ABOUT ATL LAW

ATL Law is a law firm specialising in comprehensive support for foreign investors in the Polish market. We provide multilingual advice (Polish, English and German) in tax, corporate, transfer pricing and employment law.

We advise on obtaining and settling support decisions under the Polish Investment Zone, on combining the zone exemption with the R&D relief and the IP Box, and in proceedings before the tax authorities. We support clients at every stage of entering the Polish market – from selecting the optimal legal structure, through ongoing compliance, to representation in proceedings.

www.atl-law.pl   |   office@atl-law.pl

Polish Shareholders’ Agreement (SHA)

Posted on by kancelaria

Key Investor Protection Clauses

A Guide for Entrepreneurs and Foreign Investors | ATL Law 2026

The SHA as the Cornerstone of an Investment Transaction

A shareholders’ agreement – commonly referred to as an SHA or Investment Agreement – is one of the most consequential legal documents governing the relationship between an investor and the founders or other shareholders of a company. Unlike the articles of association (umowa spółki), which are registered with the National Court Register (KRS) and therefore publicly accessible, the SHA is a confidential document containing detailed arrangements regarding rights, obligations and protective mechanisms that the parties wish to keep outside the public domain.

For an investor – whether a venture capital fund, a strategic acquirer or a high-net-worth individual investing in a start-up or a mature company – the terms of the SHA ultimately determine the scope of the investor’s control over the business, the protection of the invested capital and the available exit pathways. Carefully negotiated protective clauses can mean the difference between a successful exit and capital being locked in a business whose trajectory has diverged from the original investment thesis.

This article examines the key clauses of a SHA from an investor’s perspective, with specific reference to Polish law – in particular the provisions of the Polish Commercial Companies Code (Kodeks spółek handlowych, KSH) governing limited liability companies (sp. z o.o.) and joint-stock companies (SA). Although the SHA is a contractual instrument, its effectiveness in a Polish context depends on proper alignment with the articles of association or statutes of the company, and in certain cases requires direct incorporation into those corporate documents.

Representations and Warranties – The Foundation of Transaction Security

Representations and warranties clauses form one of the cornerstones of any investment agreement. Their purpose is to provide the investor with assurances from the selling shareholders or the company regarding the accuracy of key information about the business in which the investor is placing capital.

Scope of Warranties

In investment transactions involving Polish companies, a standard warranty package should cover at a minimum: the validity and completeness of the company’s corporate documents and the absence of any formal defects in its incorporation; the accuracy of the ownership structure and the absence of third-party rights over shares; the reliability of the financial statements prepared in accordance with Polish Accounting Standards or IFRS; the absence of pending or threatened litigation, administrative proceedings or tax proceedings that could materially affect the company’s financial position; the correctness of tax filings and the absence of arrears towards the tax authorities and the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS); and the company’s compliance with applicable law, including sector-specific regulatory requirements.

Survival Period and Claims Mechanism

A key negotiating point is the period during which the investor may pursue claims for breach of warranties (survival period), as well as the minimum and maximum thresholds of the seller’s liability. In Polish transactional practice, a multi-year claims period is typically agreed, with the period for tax warranties often corresponding to the statute of limitations for tax liabilities. This is particularly significant given that Polish tax authorities can challenge corporate tax positions several years after the relevant filings, creating ongoing exposure for the acquirer.

The claims mechanism should precisely define the notice requirements for a claim (form, content, deadline), the procedure for handling claims between the parties, and the dispute resolution framework. Well-drafted provisions in this area eliminate the risk of a claim lapsing due to procedural non-compliance.

Anti-Dilution Protections – Preserving the Investor’s Stake

Anti-dilution mechanisms are designed to protect the investor against a reduction in its percentage ownership of the company following the issuance of new shares, and – in the case of a down-round – against an economic dilution of the value of the investor’s stake.

Full Ratchet and Broad-Based Weighted Average

The most stringent form of anti-dilution protection is the full ratchet mechanism, which entitles the investor to adjust the subscription price of its shares to match the issuance price of the new round – irrespective of the number of newly issued shares. Given its potentially adverse consequences for founders and other shareholders, this mechanism is increasingly rarely accepted in deal negotiations.

A far more common solution is weighted average anti-dilution, and in particular the broad-based variant, which includes all shares (including options and other convertible instruments) in the denominator of the formula, rather than only the shares already issued. This mechanism provides a more balanced protection for the investor while minimising the negative impact on the company’s cap table.

Implementation in Polish Companies

In Polish limited liability companies, anti-dilution mechanisms require precise implementation at the level of the articles of association, as the KSH does not expressly provide for anti-dilution rights for individual shareholders. In practice, they are implemented through pre-emptive rights to subscribe for shares in a new issuance (right of first offer), financial preferential treatment of the investor’s shares, or conversion or adjustment clauses modifying the number of shares held by the investor.

Liquidation Preference – Priority Return of Capital

Liquidation preference is one of the most important rights enjoyed by an institutional investor, conferring priority in the distribution of proceeds generated by a liquidation event. The concept of a liquidation event is typically defined broadly – encompassing not only actual liquidation of the company, but also the sale of a controlling stake, a merger, a consolidation or the sale of all or substantially all of the company’s assets.

Non-Participating vs Participating Models

Under the non-participating model, the investor is entitled to a return of invested capital (sometimes augmented by a specified preferred return), following which the remaining proceeds are distributed proportionately among the other shareholders. The participating model grants the investor the right to both the preferential return and a pro-rata share in the distribution of the residual proceeds – which can result in disproportionately high payouts to the investor.

A common compromise in Polish VC/PE transactions is the participating with cap model, limiting the aggregate distributions to the investor to a specified multiple of invested capital.

Liquidation Events and Polish Law

From a Polish law perspective, the implementation of liquidation preference requires a coordinated approach at both the SHA and articles of association levels. In a sp. z o.o., the distribution of profits and liquidation proceeds is governed by the KSH, and departures from the principle of proportionality are only permissible within the limits expressly permitted by statute. It is therefore advisable that liquidation preference clauses be mirrored in the relevant provisions of the articles of association governing the preferential rights attaching to the investor’s shares.

Pre-emption and First-Refusal Rights – Controlling Ownership Structure

Provisions governing the transfer of shares are a fundamental element of any SHA. Their purpose is to ensure that existing shareholders – and in particular the investor – retain the ability to determine who enters the ownership structure of the company.

Right of First Refusal (ROFR)

A right of first refusal obliges a shareholder intending to sell its shares to offer them first to the existing shareholders (or the company) on terms no less favourable than those proposed by a prospective third-party buyer. This mechanism protects existing shareholders against an unwanted change in the ownership structure, giving them priority over third parties.

Right of First Offer (ROFO)

The right of first offer is a weaker form of protection – the selling shareholder is only required to offer the shares to existing shareholders before entering into negotiations with third parties. In practice, ROFO is more favourable to the seller, as it does not require disclosure of the terms of the third-party offer.

Transfer Restrictions – Lock-Up

The SHA should specify a minimum period during which founders and key employees are not permitted to transfer their shares (lock-up period). Lock-up clauses are designed to ensure management stability in the critical post-investment period and are particularly important in VC transactions, where the value of the company is substantially determined by the skills and commitment of its founders.

Tag-Along and Drag-Along – Rights on a Change of Ownership

Tag-Along Rights

A tag-along clause entitles a minority investor to participate in a share sale transaction initiated by a majority shareholder, on the same financial terms. This mechanism protects the minority shareholder against a scenario in which the majority shareholder sells its stake at an attractive price, leaving the minority investor without the ability to exit the investment on equivalent terms.

The scope of the tag-along clause requires precise definition of the percentage threshold of shares being sold that activates the right (trigger threshold), the mechanism for pro-rata allocation of the offer between the seller and the investor, and the legal consequences in the event the acquiring party refuses to include the investor’s shares in the transaction.

Drag-Along Rights

A drag-along clause entitles a majority shareholder (or a coalition of shareholders) to require the remaining shareholders to sell their shares on the same terms as their own, in the context of a whole-company sale transaction. This mechanism facilitates a clean exit and eliminates the risk of minority shareholders blocking the transaction.

Investor protection in the context of drag-along involves negotiating appropriate activation conditions – a minimum sale price (floor price), a minimum ownership threshold required to activate the drag-along right, and an assurance that the obligation to sell cannot be activated by the founders without the investor’s consent if it does not provide the investor with a minimum return on investment.

Information and Corporate Rights

Effective investor protection requires not only appropriate mechanisms at the exit stage, but also ongoing access to information necessary for monitoring the company’s financial and operational performance. Information rights therefore constitute an integral component of any SHA.

Financial Information Rights

The SHA should provide the investor with access to monthly and quarterly financial reports, annual financial statements audited by a statutory auditor, the annual budget and multi-year financial plans, reports on key performance indicators, and any material information relating to events affecting the company’s financial or legal position. It is advisable to reserve the right to conduct an independent audit by an auditor designated by the investor, particularly where there are grounds for concern about the accuracy of the information being provided.

Corporate Governance Rights

Alongside information rights, the SHA should address the investor’s rights in the governance of the company. Key elements include: the right to nominate or block nominations to the management board or supervisory board, veto rights over the most significant corporate decisions (reserved matters), the right to attend meetings of the company’s bodies, and the right to approve all related-party transactions.

The list of reserved matters requiring the investor’s consent is one of the key negotiating points. It typically covers: amendments to the articles of association or statutes, issuance of new shares, incurring financial liabilities above a specified threshold, disposal or encumbrance of key assets, changes to the remuneration of senior management, acquisitions and investments, and dividend distributions.

Exit Mechanisms

The exit strategy is one of the fundamental elements negotiated in any SHA. Institutional investors operating within defined investment horizons seek to guarantee mechanisms that will allow them to realise a return on their investment within a predictable timeframe and on acceptable terms.

Put Option and Redemption Right

A put option grants the investor the right to require the company or the remaining shareholders to repurchase its shares after a specified period or upon the occurrence of specified conditions (for example, failure by the company to achieve agreed financial milestones or failure to complete a public offering within the agreed timeframe). This mechanism provides protection against the investor being locked into an investment without a realistic exit pathway.

Registration Rights

In the case of joint-stock companies or companies planning a stock exchange listing, the SHA should contain registration rights provisions obliging the company or majority shareholders to ensure that the investor can sell its shares in the context of a public or secondary offering. The two principal types are demand registration rights (the right to require a public offering) and piggyback registration rights (the right to join an offering initiated by the company or other shareholders).

IPO and SPAC Clauses

Companies at an advanced stage of growth may agree in the SHA to an obligation to complete an initial public offering (IPO) or a SPAC transaction within a specified period, as one of the exit mechanisms for investors. Such clauses should specify a minimum company valuation as a precondition for the IPO, the consequences of failure to complete the IPO within the agreed timeframe, and the investor’s rights in the event of cancellation or delay of the planned transaction.

Founder-Related Provisions – Protecting the Investor’s Interests

Founder Share Vesting

The vesting mechanism makes the founders’ full acquisition of rights to their shares conditional upon their continued involvement in the company for a specified period (time-based vesting) or the achievement by the company of specified milestones (milestone-based vesting). These clauses protect the investor against a scenario in which a key founder leaves the company shortly after the investment, retaining their full shareholding.

A typical vesting schedule provides for a four-year vesting period with a one-year cliff, meaning that no shares vest during the first year, and upon completion of that first year, 25% of the unvested shares vest in a single tranche.

Good Leaver and Bad Leaver

The SHA should precisely define the consequences of a founder’s departure from the company depending on the circumstances. Departure in good circumstances (good leaver – for example, due to illness or other legitimate reasons) typically entitles the departing founder to retain their shares or have them repurchased at fair market value. Departure in bad circumstances (bad leaver – for example, as a result of a serious breach of duties or action to the detriment of the company) may result in forfeiture of unvested shares or their repurchase at nominal value.

Non-Compete and Non-Solicitation Clauses

Investment agreements invariably include non-compete and non-solicitation of clients and employees clauses imposed on founders and key management. Under Polish law, such restrictions must be precisely limited in terms of scope, territory and duration in order not to violate the principles of good faith and social coexistence and to avoid a risk of invalidity. Experience in Polish transactions indicates that non-compete clauses that are drafted with an excessively broad scope or duration are vulnerable to challenge in Polish courts.

 

Perspective of Foreign Investors

Foreign investors committing capital to Polish companies face a number of legal issues that require particular attention when drafting the SHA. The first concerns the choice of governing law. While the principle of freedom of contract in private international law permits the SHA to be governed by foreign law, the application of the Polish KSH and Civil Code as the regulatory backdrop for transactions involving Polish companies is unavoidable in practice.

This is particularly significant with respect to SHA provisions that must be implemented at the level of the company’s articles of association or statutes – those documents are governed exclusively by Polish law. In other words, the SHA may be drafted using Anglo-American templates and subjected to English or Delaware law, but its provisions will only bind the company and its bodies to the extent they are reflected in the company’s corporate documents governed by Polish law.

Tax considerations constitute a second area requiring careful attention. The structure of the investment determines its tax treatment both in Poland and in the investor’s home jurisdiction. Investment structures using holding companies located in treaty jurisdictions, combined with appropriate debt instruments and dividend preference arrangements, can significantly reduce the effective tax burden on exit proceeds.

Conclusions and Practical Recommendations

An investment agreement is a document in which detail is of fundamental importance. An investor who neglects precision in drafting protective clauses exposes itself to unpredictable risk when the events those clauses were designed to address actually materialise.

The most important practical recommendations are: precise definition of the scope and content of warranties and the mechanism for pursuing claims for their breach; careful design of anti-dilution mechanisms and liquidation preferences in a manner that accommodates the constraints of Polish company law; ensuring alignment of the SHA provisions with the company’s articles of association so that the rights arising under the SHA are enforceable against the company’s bodies; negotiating a broad list of reserved matters that gives the investor genuine control over key strategic decisions; and planning exit mechanisms at the point of investment entry, so that the scenarios for concluding the investment are anticipated and contractually governed.

Effective implementation of the above solutions requires the engagement of legal counsel with experience in both venture capital and private equity transactions and Polish company law. The combination of these competencies enables the drafting of SHA documentation that fully achieves the parties’ objectives within the Polish legal framework.

ABOUT ATL LAW

ATL Law is a law firm specialising in comprehensive legal services for foreign investors in Poland. We offer multilingual advice in the areas of corporate law, tax law, M&A transactions, venture capital and private equity. We have extensive experience in negotiating and structuring SHA investment agreements and providing integrated legal and tax advice on investment transactions in the Polish market.

www.atl-law.pl  |  office@atl-law.pl