KSeF non-compliance may trigger tax inspections despite temporary absence of penalties

• Poland has temporarily postponed the dedicated financial penalties for failure to issue invoices through the National e-Invoicing System, KSeF.
• The absence of immediate KSeF penalties does not make paper or otherwise non-compliant invoicing acceptable, and the tax authorities may use inspections to identify related VAT and accounting irregularities.
• Businesses should treat the transitional period as an implementation window, not as permission to postpone KSeF readiness, especially because inaccurate VAT reporting or unreliable records may remain sanctionable under other rules.

Extended article

Poland’s Ministry of Finance has reportedly confirmed that dedicated penalties for failing to comply with the mandatory National e-Invoicing System, KSeF, will not initially be imposed. The protective period provides businesses with additional time to stabilize their invoicing processes and resolve implementation problems without immediately facing the specific financial sanctions established for issuing invoices outside KSeF. Reports indicate that the dedicated KSeF sanctions are expected to apply from 2028. [pro.rp.pl]

However, the postponement of the dedicated penalties should not be interpreted as a general exemption from the obligation to use KSeF. The obligation and the penalty regime are separate questions. A business may still breach the invoicing requirements even if the authorities cannot yet impose the particular administrative penalty designed specifically for KSeF non-compliance.

The Polish tax administration may instead conduct inspections or verification activities where businesses continue issuing ordinary paper or electronic invoices outside the required system. Although the mere use of an invoice outside KSeF may not immediately trigger the postponed KSeF penalty, an inspection could reveal other irregularities, including incorrect VAT reporting, discrepancies between sales records and VAT returns, unreliable accounting records, duplicate invoicing, incorrect tax points or deficiencies in audit-trail documentation.

This creates an important practical distinction for taxpayers. The temporary absence of KSeF penalties reduces the immediate financial consequence of a technical or procedural failure, but it does not eliminate the underlying compliance risk. Taxpayers must still ensure that all taxable transactions are recorded correctly, VAT is reported in the proper period and supporting records remain complete and consistent.

For larger businesses, the transitional approach should therefore not lead to a relaxation of implementation governance. Companies should continue monitoring invoices that fail to enter KSeF, documenting the reasons for each failure and maintaining a controlled remediation process. Particular attention should be given to interfaces between ERP systems, middleware, KSeF and VAT reporting systems.

A robust control framework should distinguish between temporary technical failures, permitted offline invoicing scenarios and invoices issued outside KSeF without a valid legal basis. It should also reconcile the following populations:

• invoices generated in the ERP system;
• invoices submitted to KSeF;
• invoices accepted or rejected by KSeF;
• KSeF identification numbers received;
• invoices delivered outside KSeF;
• corrective invoices;
• and transactions included in the Polish VAT return and JPK reporting.

The announcement also demonstrates that the tax authorities may prioritize targeted supervision over immediate automatic sanctions during the initial implementation period. Businesses should consequently be prepared to explain not only whether an invoice was processed through KSeF, but also how failed submissions, emergency procedures and subsequent corrections were controlled.

Source: Rzeczpospolita, Przemysław Wojtasik