Publication date: July 07, 2026
At the outset, it should be emphasized that the regulation relating to witnesses in the Act of 29 August 1997, the Tax Ordinance, is laconic.
If a decision is made to take evidence by questioning a witness, the party must be notified of the place and time of the hearing at least seven days in advance. The parties may participate and ask questions during the hearing (Article 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure).
The doctrine defines a witness as someone possessing knowledge of facts relevant to the case that the tax authority is attempting to reconstruct for the purposes of the proceedings. According to the commentary on the Tax Ordinance, a witness in tax proceedings can be either a person present at an event and thus relying on their personal observations, or one who obtained information indirectly, most often from other people.
Only a natural person can be a witness, regardless of age or legal capacity. The ability to perceive reality and articulate one’s observations is crucial. Therefore, it is impossible for another entity, such as an organizational unit without legal personality or a legal person, to attempt to act as a witness.
Under applicable law, witness testimony is one of the admissible forms of evidence in tax proceedings. If this evidence is used, a concise transcript of the witness’s testimony is mandatory. However, there is one step that cannot be taken spontaneously during the proceedings. If a decision is made to hear evidence from a witness, the party must be notified of the location and time of the hearing at least seven days in advance. Parties may participate in the hearing and ask questions during it.
However, the provisions of the Tax Ordinance specify groups of individuals who cannot be questioned as witnesses. This primarily applies to individuals who, due to health conditions or other circumstances, are unable to properly perceive reality or communicate their observations. This exclusion also applies to individuals obligated to maintain the confidentiality of classified information, unless they have been released from this obligation in a legally prescribed manner. The final category includes clergy of legally recognized denominations, but only with respect to information covered by the seal of confession.
This category primarily includes individuals who, due to illness or disability, are unable to properly perceive their surroundings or communicate their observations to others. However, this does not mean that every person suffering from a mental disorder is automatically excluded from testifying. Their condition at the time of questioning is crucial – if they are capable of consciously perceiving and reporting facts, they may be questioned. In situations raising doubts, the tax authority may consult an expert, such as a psychologist or doctor. It is also worth remembering that communicating observations does not have to be exclusively verbal. Other forms of communication are also permissible, including non-verbal signals and behaviors.
Another group includes individuals obligated to maintain the confidentiality of classified information under circumstances covered by confidentiality, unless they have been released from this obligation in accordance with applicable regulations. This applies to classified information classified as top secret, secret, confidential, and restricted. As the regulation itself indicates, it is possible to release such a person from the obligation of confidentiality, however, this is an exceptional situation, not specifically addressed by the Tax Ordinance. With this in mind, legal scholars refer to the provisions of Articles 179 and 180 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The final group excluded from witnessing are clergy of legally recognized denominations – regarding facts covered by the seal of confession. The key issue is the religion and church to which the clergy belongs, as this exclusion applies only to denominations recognized by the Polish legal system.
Apart from the exceptions mentioned above, the obligation to fulfill public obligations imposed on individuals by the state is the rule. Witnessing is generally considered one of these obligations, so serving as a witness is generally unavoidable. Failure to comply with the authorities’ orders may result in disciplinary action.
Public administration bodies, including tax authorities, are obligated to act on the basis and within the limits of the law. Therefore, if for any reason it proves impossible to obtain evidence in the form of witness testimony, this cannot have negative consequences for the taxpayer.
The obligation to testify, however, is not absolute. The legislature has granted the right to refuse to testify to immediate family members of a party to the proceedings. This right is available to spouses, ascendants (e.g., parents and grandparents), descendants (children and grandchildren), siblings, first-degree relatives, as well as persons in a relationship of adoption, guardianship, or wardship. Importantly, the right to refuse to testify does not expire upon the termination of the marriage, adoption, guardianship, or wardship. Exercising this right must also not result in any negative consequences for the parties to the proceedings.
Other witnesses generally cannot refuse to testify, but in certain situations they have the right to refuse to answer a specific question. This applies to cases where answering could expose the witness or their immediate family to criminal or fiscal liability. This protection extends to the same group of individuals who are entitled to refuse to testify: spouses, ascendants, descendants, siblings, first-degree relatives, and persons related by adoption, guardianship, or wardship.
Refusing to answer a question does not constitute an admission of guilt, nor can it constitute grounds for imposing penalties on the parties. At the same time, neither legal provisions nor legal doctrine provide any guidance on the possibility of using this mechanism upon termination of a marriage, guardianship, care, or adoption. In practice, this may depend on the individual authority or court, should the decision be appealed.
Special protection is also provided to individuals bound by professional secrecy. They may refuse to answer a question if doing so would reveal legally protected information. This applies primarily to tax advisors, individuals employed by tax advisors or entities providing tax advisory services, as well as attorneys and legal counselors. The purpose of this measure is to protect the confidentiality of information entrusted to members of professions of public trust.
Before the hearing begins, the tax authority is obligated to inform the witness of their rights. This obligation is a manifestation of the principle of building public trust in the tax authorities and is intended to ensure that the witness is aware of their rights. At the same time, the authority should advise the witness of the legal liability for making false statements and the consequences that may result from providing false information.
The Act lacks any rules governing witness questioning. The regulations and legal doctrine suggest that the form may be either oral or written, but doubts arise regarding the latter. There is also no information on the procedure for conducting questioning. This leaves the authorities with considerable discretion. In addition to the authorities, the parties may also ask questions of witnesses. The regulations do not specify the extent to which a party may ask questions and provide explanations, hence the legal doctrine’s position that this is permissible at any stage of the questioning.
The Tax Ordinance does not specifically regulate the manner of conducting witness interviews. In practice, this means that tax authorities and courts often resort to solutions developed in other procedures. For example, as in civil proceedings, it is permissible to interview witnesses whose accounts contradict each other. Furthermore, case law has also accepted the possibility of confronting witnesses to clarify discrepancies in their testimony. However, if a witness resides outside of Poland, their interview may be conducted through a consul.
However, it’s important to remember that witness testimony is supplementary in tax proceedings. Tax authorities primarily use this evidence when the collected documentation – particularly tax records, accounting records, or other documents – does not allow for a clear determination of the facts and resolution of the case.
Fiscal secrecy
Fiscal secrecy is the exclusion of individual taxpayer, payer, and collector data contained in documentation submitted to the tax authority. It also covers the confidentiality of such data contained in documents held by the authority or information obtained by the authority about this data. The statutory prohibition on disclosing this type of information is intended to provide additional protection for fiscal secrecy, which is one of several secrets protected by law. The purpose of such measures is to protect individual privacy and safeguard the state’s interest. Only in special cases, for reasons of public interest, is it permissible to disclose this data to tax audits and tax authorities. Such measures are intended to protect the private interests of the person or organizational unit being audited. Expanding interpretations of provisions allowing for exceptions to the rule are also prohibited.
The scope of fiscal secrecy is very broad. It covers not only data contained in tax returns and other documents submitted by taxpayers, payers, and collectors, but also all information obtained by tax authorities in the course of performing their statutory duties.
Protection covers, among other things, information collected during inspections, tax proceedings, tax and customs audits, as well as proceedings concerning fiscal crimes and misdemeanors. Fiscal secrecy also covers data contained in tax authority documentation and information obtained from banks, other institutions, and entities cooperating with the tax administration.
The scope of protection also extends to data obtained through international exchange of tax information, double taxation procedures, risk analyses conducted by the National Revenue Administration, taxpayer cooperation programs, and investment agreements. This means that fiscal secrecy covers not only information provided directly by taxpayers, but also data collected by authorities from other sources and documentation created during ongoing proceedings.
In summary, fiscal secrecy covers not only information collected by tax authorities but also data regarding the sources of this information and how it is stored. The scope of this protection is very broad and is intended to ensure the security and confidentiality of taxpayers’ information provided to the tax administration.
This does not mean, however, that all data is strictly confidential. The legislator has provided exceptions that allow for the disclosure of certain information to a business’s contractors. This applies in particular to information about whether the taxpayer has submitted the required tax returns and documents, whether they have correctly reported the events subject to disclosure, and whether they have any tax arrears. In practice, this means that a contractor can obtain basic information that allows them to assess the business’s tax reliability and credibility.
Subjective scope
In addition to defining what information is covered by fiscal confidentiality, the legislator also specified the group of individuals obligated to maintain it. This obligation primarily rests with employees and officers of the National Revenue Administration, employees of the National Revenue Information Service, and other individuals involved in performing the duties of tax authorities.
Representatives of local government and government administration, members of local government appeal boards, persons undergoing internships and apprenticeships in tax authorities, as well as persons participating in specific tax proceedings or procedures for exchanging information with other countries are also obliged to maintain fiscal secrecy.
The list of entities covered by this obligation is broad and includes all individuals who, in connection with the performance of their duties or participation in proceedings, gain access to information protected by fiscal secrecy. The purpose of this solution is to ensure the security of taxpayer data and reduce the risk of unauthorized disclosure.
Individuals who have access to information covered by fiscal secrecy are required to sign a written confidentiality agreement. Importantly, this obligation does not expire upon termination of employment, internship, apprenticeship, or performance of a specific function. This means that information protected by fiscal secrecy cannot be disclosed even after the termination of these relationships.
The obligation of confidentiality also applies to any person to whom such information has been lawfully disclosed. Disclosure is only permissible when permitted by law. Data subjects are an exception – they are not bound by the obligation to maintain the confidentiality of information relating to them.
The attitude of the tax authorities towards the witness’s representative
In practice, tax authorities do not allow the appointment of a proxy for a witness. They justify this by citing the lack of a clear legal basis in the Tax Ordinance. This position was also confirmed by the Commissioner for Human Rights.
This approach is supported by both case law and prevailing doctrine. It has been pointed out that the participation of a witness’s attorney could be contrary to the principle that tax proceedings are open only to the parties thereto.
Although there are some opinions in the literature supporting a witness’s right to be assisted by an attorney, this view remains decidedly minority. Consequently, it is difficult to expect the tax authority to grant such a request, and the chances of an administrative court changing this position also seem slim.