According to tax regulations, everyone pays their own taxes. It's true that there are situations where the management board is responsible for the company's tax, or the heir for the deceased's tax. In such a situation, however, the third-party tax is considered to become the company's own tax. But what if, at the request of a creditor, the debtor pays the tax on their behalf, or a tax-transparent company pays the tax on its own behalf? This is discussed in today's Tax This and That.
A partner in a general partnership had precisely such doubts when it paid an income tax advance from its bank account. On the one hand, the income of a general partnership (if it is a tax-transparent partnership) is the income of the partners, but on the other, the Tax Ordinance allows for the payment of tax for a third party only up to PLN 1,000. In its application for a tax ruling, the partner argued that the partnership acted as a "tax relief agent," which should lead to the conclusion that the taxpayer settled the liability from its own funds through the partnership's bank account. The tax would therefore be properly paid.
However, the Director of the National Tax Information Service disagreed with this position. He found that the payment of tax by a third party in the amount of PLN 1,000 did not constitute effective tax payment. In this situation, the applicant's arguments are irrelevant.
The Regional Administrative Court in Gorzów Wielkopolski, which considered a complaint against the ruling, held a different view. It found that paying tax to a third party does not apply to situations where the payment is "purely technical." This is because the funds actually from the assets of a partner in a partnership. The partnership, however, is merely performing a technical act, namely a transfer to the tax office.
However, the tax authority did not give up and filed a cassation appeal. As is often the case in tax matters, the situation was a rollercoaster. The Supreme Administrative Court overturned the previous judgment, finding in favor of the tax authority (Supreme Administrative Court judgment of June 18, 2025, file reference II FSK 1225/22). The court found that, under the Commercial Companies Code, the assets of a general partnership are separate from the assets of the partners. Therefore, as a result of the partnership paying the partner's tax, the payment was made from assets not belonging to the taxpayer (partner). Such a situation cannot be classified as "reliance."
This position, although consistent with tax interpretations, is inconsistent with previously issued judgments. In its judgment of April 4, 2021 (reference number: II FSK 3305/18), the Supreme Administrative Court indicated that the mere act of making a payment by a third party does not determine whose assets the funds to cover it come from and who ultimately bears the burden. Therefore, if there is no doubt that the payment is made from the payer's funds previously collected from taxpayers, and only the technical act of payment is made through a "messenger," then there are no legal obstacles to it being made by the entity engaged by the payer for this activity.
Therefore, if the debtor were to pay tax on behalf of its creditor, or as in the example presented - the company on behalf of a partner, a better solution would be to pay the amount due, either to the creditor or to the partner, who would then pay his own tax.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
The law is current as of August 24, 2025.
author/editor of the series:
