The new powers of the Polish National Labour Inspectorate (PIP) are already having practical implications for businesses. PIP is using data from the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) and the tax administration to identify companies for scrutiny and is sending warning letters to selected businesses that use B2B contracts and mandate contracts.
Legislative changes have expanded the powers of the Polish National Labour Inspectorate to verify whether cooperation formally based on a civil law contract, including a B2B contract or a mandate contract, in fact meets the criteria of an employment relationship.
This means that businesses should pay attention not only to the wording of their contracts, but above all to how the cooperation is actually organised and performed.
PIP is already identifying businesses and sending warning letters
The new powers of PIP are no longer merely a potential regulatory risk. The Inspectorate is using data from ZUS and the tax administration to identify businesses for scrutiny and is sending warning letters to selected companies that use B2B contracts and mandate contracts.
The exchange of information between the National Labour Inspectorate, the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) and the National Revenue Administration (KAS) is intended to facilitate the identification of cases in which the manner in which a civil law contract is performed may indicate the existence of an employment relationship.
According to published information, PIP is already using data obtained from ZUS and the tax administration, although inspections making full use of the new database are expected to begin in January 2027.
Warning letters should therefore be treated as an important signal for businesses to review their existing cooperation models before a potential inspection takes place.
When can B2B cooperation be challenged?
The risk of a cooperation model being challenged increases in particular where the manner in which services are provided displays characteristics typical of an employment relationship, including where the contractor:
- performs tasks under the direction of the contracting party and follows its ongoing instructions;
- provides services at a place and time determined by the contracting party;
- is required to perform the services personally;
- does not bear significant business risk associated with their activities;
- is remunerated primarily for the time spent providing services rather than for a specific result;
- receives rights, benefits or other entitlements typically associated with employees.
What does this mean for businesses?
PIP’s actions demonstrate that the review of B2B contracts is no longer merely a theoretical regulatory risk. Businesses that rely extensively on self-employed contractors and other civil law arrangements should review their cooperation models at an early stage.
Particular attention should be paid to how the contract is performed in practice. Simply describing an agreement as a B2B contract, or the fact that the contractor operates as a sole trader, does not in itself determine the correct legal classification of the relationship.
What should be reviewed before a PIP inspection?
A recommended course of action is to conduct an audit of civil law contracts and the way in which they are actually performed. In particular, the analysis should cover:
- the manner in which instructions are issued and enforced;
- the rules for determining the place and time of service provision;
- the degree of independence enjoyed by the contractor;
- the possibility of using substitutes or subcontractors;
- the method of determining and paying remuneration;
- the scope of the contractor’s liability and business risk;
- access to benefits and other entitlements typically associated with employees;
- the contractor’s actual position and functioning within the company’s organisational structure.
Have you received a letter from PIP? Do not wait for an inspection
Receiving a warning letter should prompt businesses to review their existing contracts and the way in which their cooperation arrangements are organised in practice. It is advisable to assess the risk that individual contracts may be challenged and to prepare the business appropriately for any further action by PIP.
If irregularities are identified, it may be necessary not only to amend the contractual documentation but also to modify the practical arrangements governing the cooperation.
