Employee commuting cost reimbursement in Poland: when does it create taxable income?
In Poland, a cash allowance or reimbursement covering an employee’s ordinary commute between home and their fixed workplace generally constitutes taxable employment income. Employer-organised bus transport may qualify for a specific personal income tax exemption, but the exemption depends on the type of vehicle and the way the benefit is provided.
Under Polish tax law, employee commuting cost reimbursement in Poland generally constitutes income from employment. This applies both to a lump-sum allowance paid by the employer and to the reimbursement of expenses incurred for travel between the employee’s home and fixed workplace. The employer should include the amount in payroll and deduct an advance payment of Polish personal income tax (PIT). This position was confirmed by Poland’s Supreme Administrative Court (NSA) in its judgment of 12 March 2026, case reference II FSK 775/23.
The judgment does not mean that every form of employee transport is taxable. The Polish Personal Income Tax Act provides an exemption for transport organised by an employer using a bus. It is therefore essential to distinguish between a cash payment, employer-organised bus transport and transport provided in a smaller vehicle. Correctly classifying the benefit directly affects payroll Poland calculations.
In this article:
Is reimbursement of employee commuting costs taxable in Poland?
Yes. As a general rule, reimbursement of the cost of an ordinary commute from home to a fixed workplace is subject to PIT in Poland. The employee receives money covering an expense that they would normally have to pay themselves. This creates a measurable financial benefit connected with the employment relationship.
The Supreme Administrative Court confirmed this approach in case II FSK 775/23. The company planned to pay employees a lump-sum allowance calculated on the basis of the cost of travelling to and from the workplace. The facility was poorly served by public transport, and employees commuted from several different towns. The company argued that the reimbursement supported work organisation and did not provide employees with additional income. The NSA rejected that argument. It held that employees are generally responsible for the cost of travelling to their workplace, and that covering this expense allows them to retain funds they would otherwise have spent.
What exactly did judgment II FSK 775/23 concern?
The case concerned a lump-sum reimbursement of costs incurred by employees. It did not concern the employer purchasing a single shared bus service. This distinction matters because the tax consequences of these two arrangements may differ.
Some reports about the judgment use the general description “free transport to work”. However, the facts of the case and the court’s reasoning show that the company intended to pay employees a cash allowance compensating them for their travel expenses. The NSA noted that Article 12(1) of the Polish Personal Income Tax Act covers not only basic salary, but also other cash payments, costs borne on behalf of an employee and benefits provided free of charge. Where an employer pays an employee an amount corresponding to their commuting costs, the payment is connected with their employment.
The court also rejected the argument that the reimbursement was economically neutral. Although the employee initially pays for the journey using their own funds, the subsequent reimbursement means that they ultimately do not bear the expense.
Does poor public transport access change the PIT treatment?
No. A workplace’s difficult location, shift work or the absence of convenient public transport connections does not, in itself, prevent taxable employment income from arising. These circumstances may justify the employer’s business decision to finance commuting costs, but they do not create a tax exemption.
The company referred to Article 94(2) of the Polish Labour Code, under which an employer should organise work in a manner that ensures the effective use of working time. The NSA found, however, that this provision does not establish a general obligation for employers to finance employees’ journeys from their place of residence to the workplace.
In practice, the fact that employees may be unable to reach a shift without employer-supported transport can provide a business justification for the expenditure. On its own, however, it is not sufficient to exclude the benefit from the employee’s taxable income.
Is free employee transport in Poland always taxable?
Not always. The tax treatment depends on how the transport is financed, the type of vehicle used and whether a specific statutory exemption applies. The terms “reimbursement of commuting costs” and “employee transport” should not be used interchangeably, as they may describe different benefits for Polish tax purposes.
| Benefit model | General PIT treatment | What should the employer verify? |
|---|---|---|
| Lump-sum allowance or cash reimbursement of travel costs between home and work | Generally treated as income from employment | The value of the benefit, eligible employees and inclusion in payroll |
| Transport organised by the employer using a bus | Exemption under Article 21(1)(14a) of the Polish Personal Income Tax Act | Whether the vehicle meets the statutory definition of a bus |
| Transport using a vehicle that does not meet the statutory definition of a bus, such as a passenger car or a van designed to carry no more than nine people including the driver | No automatic exemption for bus transport | Whether participation is voluntary, whether the employee obtains a benefit and whether its value can be determined |
| Travel undertaken as part of a business trip | Rules different from those applying to an ordinary home-to-work commute | The contractual place of work, purpose of the journey and business travel documentation |
The Polish Personal Income Tax Act exempts the value of a benefit received by an employee in connection with transport organised by the employer using a bus. A bus is a vehicle designed to carry more than nine people, including the driver. The vehicle’s legal classification is decisive, rather than the informal term used by the company or transport provider.
Where a company uses a smaller vehicle, the bus transport exemption does not apply automatically. This does not necessarily mean that taxable income arises in every case. For a non-cash benefit, the employer must consider, among other matters, whether the employee uses the service voluntarily, obtains a genuine financial saving and whether the value of the benefit can be attributed to a specific individual.
In an individual tax ruling dated 12 January 2022, reference 0113-KDIPT2-3.4011.877.2021.4.NM, the Director of the National Revenue Information (KIS) concluded that transport using another type of vehicle may constitute taxable income where employees use the benefit voluntarily and save an expense that they would otherwise have had to bear themselves.
When can commuting cost reimbursement be tax-exempt in Poland?
An exemption must be based on a specific statutory provision. A clause in remuneration regulations, a management board resolution or an employment contract does not, by itself, create a PIT exemption.
In case II FSK 775/23, the court considered, among other provisions, Article 21(1)(23b) of the Polish Personal Income Tax Act. This provision concerns the reimbursement of costs arising from an employee’s use of their own vehicle for the employer’s business purposes during local journeys, provided that the employer’s obligation to bear those costs, or the right to grant reimbursement, results directly from other legislation.
This is not a general exemption for an employee’s daily journey from home to their workplace. An ordinary commute to a fixed workplace should also not be treated as a business trip. Reimbursement of business travel expenses is subject to separate rules, provided that the journey genuinely meets the conditions applicable to business travel.
Why does the employee receive taxable income if the reimbursement only covers an expense?
For PIT purposes, the relevant question is whether the employee receives a measurable benefit, including whether they avoid an expense. If the employee would normally be required to bear the cost of an ordinary commute, reimbursement of that cost improves their financial position.
In its judgment of 8 July 2014, case reference K 7/13, the Polish Constitutional Tribunal held that a benefit provided free of charge may constitute taxable income where the employee accepts it voluntarily, it is provided in the employee’s interest and it produces an individually identifiable benefit. The Tribunal also referred to benefits such as a public transport pass or transport to work, which may allow an employee to avoid an expense.
Where the employer pays a lump-sum allowance, identifying the benefit is particularly straightforward: the employer knows both the beneficiary and the amount paid in a given month. The fact that the benefit also helps the company maintain adequate staffing does not therefore determine that the employee receives no taxable income.
How should an employer account for commuting cost reimbursement in Poland?
Where the benefit is taxable, the employer should add its value to the employee’s other income from employment and calculate the applicable PIT advance payment. The amount should also be correctly recorded in payroll documentation and in the employee’s PIT-11 information return.
Before implementing an employee transport programme, the employer should:
- Determine whether the company will pay cash, purchase tickets or organise shared transport.
- Verify the type of vehicle and whether the bus transport exemption may apply.
- Define the group of employees entitled to the benefit.
- Establish how employees’ use of the transport will be documented.
- Prepare rules for valuing the benefit and transferring the relevant data to payroll.
- Analyse the PIT and social security contribution consequences separately.
The greatest risk arises where an operational decision is implemented without involving the payroll team. A company may sign a contract with a transport provider or begin paying lump-sum allowances without determining who uses the benefit, how its value should be calculated or whether the conditions for an exemption have been met.
Is commuting cost reimbursement subject to Social Insurance Institution contributions?
Judgment II FSK 775/23 concerns PIT and does not directly determine how contributions to the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) should be calculated. As a general rule, an employee’s income from employment forms part of the contribution assessment basis, although Polish social security regulations provide separate exclusions.
One such exclusion concerns material benefits arising from collective labour agreements, remuneration regulations or other pay rules, including benefits involving the use of free or partly paid transport. This exclusion should not automatically be applied to a cash lump-sum allowance. Giving an employee access to transport is different from paying them money to compensate for an expense they have incurred. A cash reimbursement model therefore requires a separate social security contribution analysis.
What does the judgment mean for HR, finance and payroll teams?
The judgment confirms that a business justification for providing a benefit does not replace the need for a statutory tax exemption. A chief financial officer should consider the full cost of the programme, including the price of transport or reimbursement, the payroll impact, potential social security contributions and administrative expenses.
The HR team should ensure that internal regulations and employee communications are consistent. The payroll team, in turn, needs data enabling the benefit to be allocated to specific individuals and reporting periods. Companies operating several facilities should consider developing a single decision-making framework for all locations.
If a company plans to finance employee commuting or currently pays lump-sum commuting allowances, the programme should be reviewed before the next payroll run. getsix® can support employers in assessing the PIT and ZUS consequences and implementing an appropriate process through its payroll Poland services and tax advisory in Poland.
Interpretative basis:
This article was written by the getsix® Editorial Teamgetsix® provides accounting, tax advisory, HR and payroll, and business consulting services, supporting companies operating in Poland. The getsix® Editorial Team prepares practical information that makes Polish accounting, tax, and HR and payroll matters easier to understand.
If you have any questions regarding this topic or if you are in need for any additional information – please do not hesitate to contact us:
CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIPS DEPARTMENT
ELŻBIETA
NARON-GROCHALSKA
Head of Customer Relationships
Department / Senior Manager
getsix® Group
***
