Business insights

IP Box and Poland’s solidarity levy in 2027: two changes to calculate together

Przemysław Szot 28.10.2026

Ilustracja koncepcyjna w stylistyce Tax Legal Partner.

An individual using Poland’s IP Box could continue to pay 5% on qualifying income in 2027 yet face a higher overall burden once the solidarity levy is included. Two separate bills explain the difference: one brings personal IP Box income into the levy’s base, while the other raises its rate from 4% to 5%. A reliable forecast needs both texts.

Extending the base and increasing the rate are separate changes

The bill in paper 3137 adds income from qualifying intellectual property rights, as defined in Article 30ca(3) of the Polish Personal Income Tax Act, to the income included in the solidarity levy. It also changes how deductions and reductions are taken into account when establishing the levy’s base.

The bill in paper 3147 changes the rate itself from 4% to 5%. The PLN 1 million threshold serves a different purpose from the IP Box rate. The levy applies to the excess of the relevant aggregate income above that threshold, after the reductions permitted by law.

It is therefore insufficient to ask whether income from one software project exceeded PLN 1 million. Other income belonging to the same individual may enter the same statutory base. Automatically adding five percentage points to all IP Box income would also misrepresent the calculation.

Which provisions change the base and which change the rate?

Article 1(14) of the bill in paper 3137 amends Article 30h(2) of the PIT Act to extend the base. IP Box income is defined by Article 30ca(3), taking account of the nexus ratio in paragraph 4. The preferential 5% rate comes from Article 30ca(1); separate record-keeping requirements are in Article 30cb. Without identifying qualifying income correctly, neither the relief nor the proposed levy can be calculated reliably.

The rate increase is a separate amendment to Article 30h(1), contained in Article 1(2) of the bill in paper 3147. In section 11 of the explanatory memorandum to the first bill, the government also refers to resolving disputes over losses and other reductions of the base. The review must therefore classify permissible deductions and the source of any loss, rather than simply adding IP Box income to a spreadsheet.

Would the preferential 5% IP Box rate disappear?

The proposed extension of the solidarity levy’s base does not abolish the 5% IP Box rate. Eligibility still requires a separate examination of research and development activity, an appropriate intellectual property right, income attributable to that right and the required records. Working as a programmer or invoicing for IT services does not, by itself, establish eligibility.

This article concerns individuals claiming IP Box under Polish PIT. A company subject to CIT does not owe an individual’s solidarity levy simply because it uses IP Box. The company’s tax position and any subsequent income of its shareholders must be analysed separately.

Example: PLN 1.4 million of qualifying income

Assume a model case in which an entrepreneur has PLN 1,400,000 of income correctly qualifying for IP Box, with no other income included in the levy and no losses or deductions. IP Box tax at 5% is PLN 70,000.

Additional burden under the alternative legislative scenarios
Scenario	Levy on the PLN 400,000 excess	IP Box and levy combined
IP Box enters the base; levy remains at 4%	PLN 16,000	PLN 86,000
IP Box enters the base; levy increases to 5%	PLN 20,000	PLN 90,000

This compares legislative scenarios; it does not predict the final legislation. It excludes social contributions and other business charges. It also shows why saying “IP Box will rise to 10%” obscures the mechanism: the levy applies above a threshold, and the bases of the two charges need not be identical.

Which income year and payment deadline do the bills cover?

The transitional provisions envisage first applying the solidarity levy changes to the settlement whose payment deadline falls on 2 May 2028. For an individual in the usual situation, that concerns income for 2027. The legislation’s entry into force should not be confused with an immediate obligation to pay a levy on income earned earlier.

For paper 3137, the Senate clarified the transitional provision to cover the new paragraph on prohibited deductions as well. The final calculation therefore depends both on the amount of income and on how the base must be established under the rules ultimately adopted.

Preparing a 2027 calculation

Distinguish invoiced revenue from income and from qualifying IP Box income.
Review contracts, ownership of work results and the allocation of income to specific qualifying rights.
Reconcile cost records and the nexus ratio with project documentation.
Collect the individual’s other income sources that may enter the levy’s base.
Model the base, deductions and both the 4% and 5% levy rates, rather than applying one approximate percentage to turnover.

This review is useful even if forecast income remains below PLN 1 million. A one-off disposal of a right, an additional contract or other income may change the annual result. Reviewing the position during the year helps estimate the cash reserve needed for the eventual payment.

Licensing or selling rights: R&D relief and losses in the calculation

IP Box on a non-exclusive licence: must the developer sell the copyright?

In the ruling of 10 September 2026, 0115-KDST2-2.4011.545.2026.2.MS, the taxpayer developed her own programs, granted paid non-exclusive licences and retained economic copyright. KIS accepted 5% for qualifying licence income under PIT Article 30ca(7)(1). The described development work and per-right records mattered. The authority distinguished those activities from her entire programming business: routine services do not become R&D merely because the same entrepreneur supplies them.

Licence fees are a separate statutory route to income from a qualifying right. A developer can retain ownership while charging for use. The case linked the particular software to development work, licence revenue and the records for that right, allowing the qualifying income to be identified.

Selling software copyright: how is qualifying IP Box income determined?

The ruling of 26 October 2026, 0113-KDWPT.4011.666.2026.2.KU, concerned, among other things, creative software functions for secure exchange and verification of identity data. KIS accepted the stated R&D and sales of software copyright under Article 30ca(7)(2). It stressed two calculations: income from the right and the nexus ratio, with appropriate cost allocation. The ruling also covered a specified future period, conditional on unchanged facts and law. It therefore does not confirm unchanged burdens after a 2027 amendment.

Two calculations follow in sequence. First deduct the relevant costs from revenue attributable to the right. Then use nexus to determine the eligible portion of that income. Keeping those stages separate matters where the developer combines its own development with acquired research results.

Does R&D relief reduce solidarity levy after a PIT-36L correction?

In the ruling of 16 September 2026, 0115-KDIT3.4011.669.2026.1.RS, a chemical-industry entrepreneur amended PIT-36L after claiming R&D relief. KIS rejected the corresponding reduction in the solidarity-levy base, treating Article 30h(2)’s deductions as exhaustive. The issue was the additional Article 26e deduction, not a prohibition on recognising actual ordinary business expenses. A differing court view is discussed below.

The dispute concerned moving from business income to the levy base. An ordinary deductible expense affects income, while Article 26e gives an additional R&D deduction. KIS considered that additional deduction outside the levy’s permitted reductions. The contrasting WSA judgment discussed below addresses that particular calculation stage.

Business losses and solidarity levy: how are earlier losses taken into account?

The ruling of 24 July 2026, 0113-KDIPT2-3.4011.409.2026.1.SJ, accepted business losses from 2023–2024, properly deducted in PIT-36L for 2025, in DSF-1 filed in 2026 as well. KIS linked Article 30h(2) to Article 9(3). This permits neither arbitrary cross-source loss transfers nor disregard of limits, the five-year period or subsequent legislation.

The deduction followed the rules for a loss from the same income source. The 2023–2024 losses had been deducted against 2025 business income, and KIS accepted that income for the levy too. Records should show the loss year, amounts used and remaining balance within Article 9(3)’s limits.

Software documentation and R&D relief in solidarity levy: the courts’ approach

The final Łódź WSA judgment of 5 October 2022, I SA/Łd 476/22, concerned software design documentation. The court quashed a ruling taking an unduly narrow view of a computer program and addressed copyright-protected preparatory design materials. Not every note, timetable or business analysis qualifies. Examine the output, its connection to the program, protection and transferred rights; the job title “project manager” does not establish eligibility.

In its final judgment of 6 November 2025, II FSK 238/23, the NSA quashed the judgment and order leaving an application unexamined. KIS could not require the taxpayer conclusively to classify his work as R&D when that was the legal question submitted. The applicant must describe the facts fully; the authority must assess their legal character. This procedural decision does not automatically award every developer a 5% rate.

In its judgment of 21 April 2026, I SA/Gl 1234/25, the Gliwice WSA quashed a decision refusing recognition of an overpaid solidarity levy and accepted R&D relief when determining its base. CBOSA marks the judgment as not final. Alongside KIS’s refusal above, this demonstrates an actual dispute. Review the law for the relevant year and the route to protection rather than treating a favourable judgment as a general exemption. It also explains the context of proposed prospective restrictions on deductions.

Nexus and combined income: two further models

Our nexus model. Income from one qualifying IP before nexus is PLN 1,000,000. Correctly allocated cumulative costs under Article 30ca(4) are: a = PLN 100,000 own R&D, b = PLN 20,000 R&D results bought from an unrelated party, c = PLN 80,000 from a related party, d = 0. Nexus is (100,000 + 20,000) × 1.3 ÷ 200,000 = 0.78. Qualifying income is PLN 780,000 and 5% tax is PLN 39,000.

The remaining PLN 220,000 follows the business’s ordinary rules. Assuming 19% flat tax without other adjustments, it produces PLN 41,800: total PIT PLN 80,800 before other settlements. Distinguish IP income before nexus from qualifying income after nexus. Costs a–d calculate the separate ratio and are not deducted a second time from income already established.

Our proposed combined-income model. Assume PLN 800,000 already properly qualifying for 5% IP Box plus PLN 450,000 other flat-tax income, without losses or other reductions. IP Box alone is below one million, but the proposed expanded sum is PLN 1,250,000. The excess is PLN 250,000, giving a levy of PLN 10,000 at 4% or PLN 12,500 at 5%. Under the present catalogue IP Box income itself is excluded, while the remaining PLN 450,000 does not exceed the threshold. This model concerns that individual and those income sources; spouses’ receipts or a company’s turnover are not automatically aggregated.

Document the creative output and right, licence or sale revenue, income costs, nexus costs and DSF-1 income separately. A favourable 5% ruling does not automatically decide every component or the effects of a later amendment.

Questions from business owners

Will every programmer pay the solidarity levy?

No. First establish the type and amount of income included in the statutory base. A job title or invoiced turnover does not determine whether the threshold is exceeded.

Does only IP Box income count?

No. The levy takes account of the individual’s statutory aggregate of income. Other sources included in that list must be considered.

Must both bills be adopted together?

They follow separate legislative proceedings. Track the base extension and rate increase separately, then combine their final effects in the tax model.

R&D relief and IP Box: costs, income and records

TLP can review eligibility for IP Box and help prepare alternative calculations for your 2027 Polish tax position.

Let’s discuss your situation

Briefly describe your business situation and the question you would like to resolve. We will agree the scope of the analysis and the documents needed in our reply.

Starting points for our discussion

Distinguish invoiced revenue from income and from qualifying IP Box income.
Review contracts, ownership of work results and the allocation of income to specific qualifying rights.

Send us a message

We will agree the scope and order of the next steps. The assessment depends on the facts, documents and Polish provisions applicable to your situation.

Sources and scope

This article concerns Polish law and documents available on 31 October 2026. The example is hypothetical. Actual amounts and consequences depend on the relevant documents and transitional provisions.