(POLAND) — Poland has introduced a draft DST act, seeking public consultation starting February 2, 2026, that would impose a 3% tax on revenues from targeted digital services tied to Poland, regardless of tax residency or headquarters.
1) Overview of Poland’s proposed Digital Services Tax (DST)
Poland’s Ministry of Digital Affairs has put forward a proposed Digital Services Tax (Digital Services Tax, or “DST”) designed as a compensatory tax on revenue from certain digital business models connected to Poland. The draft act was submitted to the government’s legislative program on January 27, 2026, and the consultation window is scheduled to begin on February 2, 2026.
A DST is different from corporate income tax. Instead of taxing profit, it targets revenue, which can matter even when a platform is loss-making, scaling fast, or reinvesting heavily. That design is why cross-border platforms—especially remote-first startups, digital nomad-founded apps, and multinational groups—are paying attention. A company can be outside Poland, yet still have Poland-connected revenue if Polish users are part of the value creation.
Nothing is enacted yet. Draft text can change during consultations and later legislative steps.
2) In-scope services and activities
Poland’s proposal focuses on three revenue streams commonly associated with large online platforms:
Targeted digital advertising. This covers ads shown on an interface directed at Polish users, where the advertiser is paying for user attention or interaction. A practical example is a social app selling targeted placements to reach users in Poland.
Multilateral digital interfaces. These are platforms that enable users to find and interact with other users, and often to exchange goods or services. Marketplaces, ride-hailing apps, and some social or dating platforms fit the general idea. The key is the platform’s “matching” or interaction layer, not merely having a website.
User data monetization. Selling, licensing, or otherwise earning revenue from data generated by user activity can fall in scope, whether the data is individual-level or aggregated.
A recurring concept is the “Polish connection.” the draft aims to link taxable revenue to Poland when the interface is directed at Polish users and monetization is tied to user participation. Signals that may be used (depending on the final rules) can include language and user experience choices (for example, Polish-language flows), pricing or checkout in PLN, Poland-targeted ad settings, and technical or analytics indicators that suggest user location. Many platforms already use similar signals for ad delivery, fraud prevention, or content localization.
The in-scope/out-of-scope line can feel counterintuitive. Think of it like this: selling ad attention, running a matching marketplace, or monetizing user activity data is closer to “platform intermediation,” which is what DST proposals typically target.
3) Exclusions and scope clarifications
Several common digital activities are carved out to prevent the DST from becoming a broad tax on all online commerce or media.
Digital content delivery where the provider owns distribution rights is excluded. A streaming service distributing content it has rights to is treated differently than a platform primarily earning from facilitating third-party interactions or ad targeting.
Online sales via a supplier’s own website are excluded when the supplier is not acting as an intermediary. A brand selling its own goods through its own store is a different model than a marketplace connecting third-party sellers to buyers.
Regulated financial services are excluded, along with crowdfunding, payment services, and editorial publishing. These exclusions reflect existing regulatory frameworks and long-standing policy sensitivities around financial intermediation and independent journalism.
Borderline examples help. An app store that processes third-party transactions and governs discovery can look more like an intermediary interface than a company selling only its own digital product on its own site. Similarly, a platform enabling third-party merchants to list goods generally raises different DST questions than a single merchant’s direct-to-consumer store.
Table 2: Quick view—what tends to be in scope vs excluded (and how “Polish connection” may be assessed)
| In-scope Services / Activities | Key Determining Cues for Polish Connection | Exclusions |
|---|---|---|
| Targeted digital advertising | Interface directed at users in Poland; Poland-focused targeting settings; ad impressions or views tied to users in Poland | Editorial publishing; regulated financial services |
| Multilateral digital interfaces (marketplaces, ride-hailing, social interaction platforms) | Polish user presence is part of the matching or interaction; user-location indicators; Polish-language flows or PLN presentation | Direct online sales on a supplier’s own website when not acting as an intermediary |
| Sale/licensing/monetization of user data from user activity | Data is generated from user activity connected to Poland; monetization depends on user participation | Content delivery where the provider owns distribution rights; crowdfunding; payment services |
4) Taxpayers and thresholds
Liability is framed around revenue scale, not where the business is headquartered or tax-resident. In other words, Poland-connected revenue is the anchor, and non-Polish companies may be affected.
Two thresholds matter:
- A global revenue threshold in the prior period, described as €1 billion, with some reporting also referencing €750 million. That discrepancy is one reason affected groups should track consultations and the final text.
- A separate Polish threshold: PLN 25 million of taxable revenue in the prior period tied to in-scope services connected to Poland.
Group structures also matter. Many DST proposals look at consolidated groups, which can pull in entities that do not independently meet thresholds but sit inside a larger group that does.
Digital nomads and remote founders should not assume “I’m not based in Poland” ends the analysis. A remote-first SaaS product with a targeted digital advertising module, a marketplace with Polish buyers and sellers, or a mobile app monetizing Polish user activity through ads can create Poland-connected revenue even with a foreign incorporation and a distributed team.
Table 1: Thresholds and scope—side-by-side
| Category | Thresholds / Scope | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Global size gate | €1 billion (also reported as €750 million) global revenue in the prior period | Verify the final enacted threshold; draft-stage figures may change |
| Poland-connected revenue gate | PLN 25 million Polish taxable revenue in the prior period | Focuses on revenue connected to Poland, not profit |
| Who can be covered | Entities and potentially consolidated groups providing Poland-connected services | Tax residency or headquarters location is not the main determinant |
5) Tax base, rate, and credits
Poland’s draft DST is built on a revenue base, meaning the tax is computed on qualifying revenue that is due or paid in the period, rather than on profit. That can shift planning assumptions. A platform can owe DST even when it has slim margins, high acquisition costs, or heavy R&D spending.
The headline rate is 3%, described as a maximum (a cap). For basic forecasting, the working concept is:
- Estimated DST = 3% × Poland-connected revenue, subject to any reduction mechanism.
To mitigate double taxation, the draft includes a reduction tied to attributable corporate income tax (CIT). The policy logic is simple: if the same stream of business activity is already bearing CIT, DST should be reduced so the combined burden is not purely additive. In practice, that approach can create documentation and data needs, such as mapping which revenue is treated as Poland-connected for DST purposes and how much CIT is attributable to it.
Commercial terms may need review. Pricing pages, ad insertion orders, marketplace terms, and invoicing descriptions can affect how revenue is categorized and traced. Analytics also matter. Platforms typically need consistent internal reporting to tie revenue to Poland-connected user participation without collecting extra personal data beyond what is necessary and lawful.
⚠️ Beware of evolving definitions of “Polish connection” and potential changes to thresholds during consultations.
6) Timeline, status, and next steps
Key dates are already on the calendar. Poland’s Ministry of Digital Affairs submitted the draft on January 27, 2026. Public consultations are set to start on February 2, 2026.
No implementation date has been set. A typical sequence after consultations includes written feedback, revisions to the draft, parliamentary work, publication, and then entry into force. Each stage can reshape definitions, thresholds, and administrative rules.
Preparation during the consultation period is mostly operational. Companies can start by identifying which products and revenue streams might be treated as in-scope, then mapping how Poland-connected revenue could be measured with existing billing and analytics. Contract language and invoicing descriptions may also need a health check, especially where bundles mix subscription fees with ad revenue, data monetization, or marketplace commissions.
✅ What affected digital platforms and remote-first businesses should do now: map Poland-connected revenue, review contracts and invoicing language, and monitor the DST consultation process.
7) Context and related developments
Poland has framed the DST discussion around fairness and funding priorities, including support for technology development, innovation, and media. The proposal also fits into a wider European pattern: policymakers often treat certain platform models—especially targeted digital advertising and multi-sided marketplaces—as generating local value through user participation.
Earlier policy discussion in Poland included a narrower audiovisual media tax concept, later broadened into a DST-style approach. That history matters because it helps explain why the current draft focuses on platform monetization mechanics rather than on where a company books profit.
Separate 2026 compliance changes may also affect digital operators in Poland, such as invoicing digitization obligations. Those rules are distinct from DST, but the operational theme overlaps: data quality, transaction labeling, and consistent reporting can matter even for founders who are not tax-resident in Poland.
This article discusses a proposed tax policy under active consultation and is not tax or legal advice.
Final text may change; readers should consult official government sources and tax professionals for current guidance. The most time-sensitive step is internal: identify Poland-connected revenue streams before February 2, 2026 so consultation feedback and business planning are grounded in real numbers.
