Insurance services which are purchased from non-residents are not subject to flat-rate WHT. In the judgment of the Voivodship Administrative Court in Bydgoszcz of 22 January 2020, ref. ISA/Bd 655/19 the court held that insurance services cannot be considered as similar to guarantee and surety agreements. Firstly, despite some common features, it is the obligation to pay the insurance premium (which does not exist for guarantees and insurance) that differentiates them. Secondly, such a qualification is supported by the internal systemic interpretation consisting in the compilation of the content of Article 21.1.2a and Article 15e of the CIT Act. Article 21 refers to sureties and guarantees and similar benefits, while Article 15e lists insurance, guarantees and sureties and similar benefits. In this context, it cannot be assumed under the same law that once an insurance contract is a benefit similar to guarantees and warranties, but under another provision of that law it is no longer a similar benefit.

A similar position was presented in the judgment of the Provincial Administrative Court in Poznań of 11 February 2020, file I SA/PO 927/19, in which the court held that insurance services do not constitute services of a similar nature, indicating that in order to consider that a benefit not directly listed in Article 21(1)(2a) of the Act on Administrative Cooperation is covered by its scope, it is decisive that the elements characteristic of the benefits directly listed in the said provision prevail over the characteristics of the benefits not listed therein.

 

Author: Izabela Lipka – Tax consultant

WRITE TO US

NAPISZ DO NAS

X