Transfer Pricing Audits in Poland: Current Trends and Forecasts for 2026

Transfer pricing audits in Poland are a complex process that goes beyond a simple verification of documentation accuracy. These are multi-month projects in which tax authorities delve deeply into the group’s operating model, the role of the Polish entity, and the logic behind the entire value chain. As a result, transfer pricing audits in Poland are, in practice, a business model audit of the Polish entity within the group, not merely a check of formalities.

Data from 2020-2024 clearly illustrates the scale of this phenomenon: a total of 1,728 transfer pricing audits were completed, with the average audit conducted by the Customs and Tax Offices (UCS) in Poland in 2024 lasting 484 days – almost one and a half years. This is approximately 1.8 times longer than the average CIT audit in Poland, which in practice means that during a transfer pricing audit, a company can expect detailed questions over two full reporting seasons.

Transfer pricing audits require the involvement of management, finance, controlling, business units, and advisors. For foreign headquarters, this means the necessity of synchronising transfer pricing approaches across multiple jurisdictions – as the Polish tax authority often asks questions not only about Polish data but also about the logic of the entire structure.

Fewer Audits, More Precision – Changes in the Landscape in Recent Years

At first glance, the numbers provided by the Ministry of Finance may suggest a calming trend: the annual number of TP audits decreased from 395 in 2020 to 259 in 2024. However, this visible decrease is not due to reduced activity by the authorities but rather a change in strategy – moving from broad, mass taxpayer selection to more precise, targeted actions based on TPR forms and advanced data analytics.

The authorities are focusing not only on income and taxes but also on losses. In the analysed period, PLN 4.45 billion (approximately EUR 1,05 billion) of additional income was identified, and PLN 1.87 billion (approximately EUR 440 million) in losses were contested. This is a clear signal that losses, especially long-standing ones related to transactions with related parties, are viewed by the tax authorities as a red flag. With the use of TPR forms, authorities can easily identify irregularities not just at the company level but also within specific transactions, allowing them to take effective action.

Ministry of Finance Tightens Its Stance on Aggressive Tax Planning

In 2025, the fight against aggressive tax planning in Poland has gained momentum, with transfer pricing now being a primary target. The Ministry of Finance has announced that it intends to focus its efforts on neutralising the actions of taxpayers who use transfer pricing to shift profits abroad and avoid paying the necessary taxes in Poland. The Ministry will be supported in this fight by the National Revenue Administration (KAS). The result could be stricter transfer pricing audits.

Currently, KAS is placing significant emphasis on improving its personnel. In August 2025, the KAS Competence Centre was established to support KAS in identifying and neutralising the actions of large companies that understate their income taxes. The goal is to identify situations where transfer prices are artificially inflated or deflated in transactions between related companies from different countries. As a result, lower income is reported in Poland, leading to a reduction in tax.

2026 – What’s Ahead?

The data collected and the announced actions clearly indicate that transfer pricing audits in Poland are entering a new phase. There are several clear directions:

1. Systematic Audits – Polish authorities are now considering periodic transfer pricing audits for the largest taxpayers, with annual revenues exceeding around PLN 5 billion (approximately EUR 1.2 billion). While it is uncertain whether these regulations will come into effect, they clearly indicate the direction of future changes. These cyclical audits would act as a “periodic technical review” of intra-group settlement models in certain market segments.
2. Selectivity – The focus will be on transactions with the highest profit-shifting potential:
   • Financial transactions (loans, cash pooling, guarantees, etc.),
   • Royalty fees and settlements for intangible assets,
   • Intangible services (management, marketing, IT, advisory),
   • Business restructurings, function and risk transfers, and supply chain reorganizations.
3. Polish Company Profile – Data shows that the authorities view models with suspicion where a Polish company:
   • Generates significant income but reports low profitability due to high payments abroad (licenses, services, financing),
   • Has long-term losses, especially on transactions with related entities.

Thanks to the TPR, authorities now see not only a company’s profitability but also the profitability of individual types of transactions. A model that a few years ago might have been considered “difficult but acceptable” is now quickly becoming a candidate for an audit.

For foreign groups, this is a clear signal: if a Polish company is a key link in the value chain but its financial results do not reflect this, the question “why?” will sooner or later be asked – whether in the form of questions during verification procedures or a full audit.

Financial Transactions – New Resilience Test for Group Models

Financial transactions are set to become one of the most sensitive areas, as they can easily influence the level of taxable profits in Poland.

When it comes to financial transactions, several basic rules must be considered:

1. Arm’s Length Principle Beyond Interest Rates – Simply having a benchmark for interest rates is no longer sufficient to convince authorities. They expect the analysis to cover all significant parameters of the transaction: type of financing, term, currency, collateral, covenants, debtor risk profile, and functions performed by the lender.
2. Debt Capacity – The key question is not only “Is the interest rate arm’s length?” but also “Would the Polish company be able to obtain and service such financing from an independent entity?” The debt capacity analysis becomes the first, mandatory step – only after that can the arm’s length interest rate and other financing terms and conditions be reliably determined.
3. Business Justification and Alternatives – The authorities will look at debt financing in a broader context: does the debt replace traditional capitalisation, is the level of debt reasonable relative to the scale of operations and risks, and has the group considered realistic alternatives (e.g., capital contributions, keeping profits within the company)?
4. Impact on Results – not just EBIT, but also EBT – The authorities will examine how financial costs affect the results before tax (EBT). If the Polish company achieves a solid EBIT but, after interest, its EBT drops to near zero or turns into a loss, the question arises as to whether such a structure leads to a systematic shifting of profits to other jurisdictions.
5. Up-to-date Analysis and Benchmarks – Under Polish regulations, transfer pricing analyses should be updated at least every three years or more frequently if economic conditions change significantly. This means that benchmarks from a few years ago may no longer reflect the current market situation.

Conclusion – Time for a Fair Review of Intra-group Settlements

Poland is entering a period of very detailed transfer pricing audits, conducted by specialised UCS and supported by the KAS Competence Centre. Data from recent years shows that tax authorities are increasingly leveraging available information and focusing on structures that can most easily be used to shift profits abroad.

From the perspective of foreign groups, this means the need for an early, conscious review of:

• License transactions and settlements for intangible assets,
• Intangible services – with evidence that they were actually performed and brought measurable benefits to the Polish entity (benefit test)
• Intra-group financing models, including debt analysis, debt servicing capacity, and the impact of financing on the EBT results,
• Any models where high payments abroad result in low profitability or long-term losses for the Polish entity.

The earlier these issues are analysed and documented, the lower the risk of the tax authorities being the first to question the logic of intra-group settlements in Poland.

***

If you found this article insightful and would like to learn more about transfer pricing audits and recent administrative court rulings in Poland, please feel free to contact me at magdalena.dymkowska@mddp.pl. Alternatively, you can download our comprehensive brochure here: https://www.mddp.pl/transfer-pricing-in-case-law-a-review-of-trends-in-2024/.