Has the business of running escape rooms actually encountered legal loopholes or have the entrepreneurs failed to fulfill all their duties? You will receive an answer to this and other questions in this material.
The attorney Joanna Sebzda-Załuska was a guest of a morning TVP broadcast on 10.01.2019 and talked about the duties that rest on entrepreneurs running an escape room business.
Link to the program (conversation from minute: 13:25): https://www.tvp.info/40532144/10012019-0629
The attorneys Jakub Obiegły and Michał Tuszyński became members of the Working Group for Distributed Ledger and Blockchain technology appointed in the Ministry of Digitization.
The Group aims at experience sharing in order to create a friendly and safe space for new engineering companies. The tasks undertaken by this initiative include, inter alia, improvement of cooperation mechanisms within the administration and elimination of development barriers.
“We want to critically identify areas in which the applications of blockchain technology create actual benefits to other technical solutions. We intend to promote standards and good practices contributing to the growth of trust in trading and public administration. We would like to inspire scientific circles for research related to the development and use of blockchain technologies, including in such areas as cryptography, cryptographic protocols, algorithms, cryptoeconomics, law of new technologies, distributed systems, cybersecurity.” – we may read on the website of the Ministry of Digitization.
Members of the Group include representatives of key stakeholders of the development of blockchain applications.
The Minister of Internal Affairs and Administration wants to introduce changes to the fire regulations applicable to buildings in which so-called escape rooms operate.
In today's issue of Wiadomości on TVP1 television channel, a commentary was given by the attorney Joanna Sebzda-Załuska, legal counsel, partner at GWW.
A driver who will not turn on the GPS, as of January will pay a fine of PLN 7.5 thousand, according to the excise tax regulations. From July, a penalty of PLN 500 will be charged for a minor error, even a typo, in JPK (Standard Audit File-Tax – SAF-T). What changes can we expect from the Ministry of Finance in 2019?
Commentary by Radosław Graboś in the latest article for Prawo.pl
"(…) at the beginning of 2019, the legislator introduced provisions to the tax ordinance enabling the authorities to determine an additional tax liability, which will be charged to the taxpayer regardless of the tax originally due. A standard amount of this additional tax liability was set at 10%, and in the case of decisions issued under the anti-avoidance clause, up to 40% of the amount of unduly claimed or overstated tax loss and income not shown in whole or in part. Furthermore, depending on the situation, the additional tax liability may be doubled or even tripled. In addition, on the basis of the PIT Act, apart from the penalties mentioned above, the tax authorities also have the option of imposing a 75% sanction tax on revenues that were not disclosed in the tax return. Another thing to be mentioned is the penalties already applicable under the VAT Act. The additional tax liability may be determined in the amount from 20% (correction of the return taking into account all irregularities found and payment of the tax liability), up to even 100% – in the case of using a so-called “blank invoice.” – says Radosław Graboś.
“Apart from the sanctions mentioned above, the taxpayer may also be subject to criminal and fiscal or criminal liability. The list of penal measures and sanctions has been considerably expanded over the past few years. In addition to a fine (amounting to tens of millions of zlotys in the most severe version), the taxpayer may also be sentenced to the penalty of limitation or deprivation of liberty (even for 25 years) In addition to these penalties, the Criminal Code also provides for the possibility of depriving the perpetrators of their property, inter alia, by way of forfeiture of an enterprise.".
Link to the article: https://www.prawo.pl/podatki/kary-dla-podatnikow-w-polsce-rosna-blad-w-jpk-vat-import-kks-itp,354638.html
Public Procurement Law regulations indicate which contracts constitute subcontracting agreements, but a question arises whether each entity participating in execution of a public contract is a subcontractor.
Marta Lipińska analyzes features of subcontracting agreements in the Przetargi Publiczne monthly and points out that “A subcontracting agreement should not be understood as contracts for deliveries signed with producers of, for instance, building materials or other products that do not form part of the public contract (i.e. they are not subject to take-over by the contracting authority, are widely available on the market, were not produced to complete the contract, were not produced according to the contracting authority’s exact specifications).”
http://www.przetargipubliczne.pl/archiwum/art,8332,podwykonawcy-dostaw-lub-uslug.html
At the beginning of the New Year, taxpayers will have to face next changes in the field of transfer pricing regulations. The legislator's purpose is to introduce some simplifications in the context of documentary obligations of entities effecting controlled transactions, while at the same time introducing solutions that will allow auditing taxpayers regardless of their revenues or costs, referring in this respect to solutions effective before 2017.
“Since 1 January 2019, provisions of the CIT Act and the PIT Act will no longer make the obligation to prepare transfer pricing documentation conditional upon the taxpayer reaching a certain threshold of revenues or costs in the year preceding the documentation preparation. Currently, this threshold is 2 million euros.
One of determinants of the obligation to prepare local documentation for a controlled transaction will be the achievement of a specific documentation threshold, which will amount to PLN 10 million for a commodity transaction, PLN 10 million for a financial transaction, PLN 2 million for a service transaction, and PLN 2 million for transactions other than those referred to above.”
Link to the article: https://www.rp.pl/Podatek-dochodowy/312319996-Nowe-prawo-2019-mniej-obowiazkow-dokumentacyjnych-dla-MSP.html
How to avoid the risk of challenging environmental decisions? Marta Banasiak's commentary on this topic can be found on the sozosfera.pl portal
– “Opinions are usually issued at several stages of the ongoing proceedings and each of them is a prerequisite to recognize that a decision closing the process has been properly proceeded. First of all it should be mentioned that applying for a respective approval or opinion to opinion-giving authorities does not fall within responsibilities of an applicant (investor). An authority that conducts the proceedings is in charge of this and it sort of takes place “ex officio”. Nevertheless, an entity interested in obtaining an environmental decision should exercise great care and caution, by constantly verifying whether the authority conducting proceedings is taking appropriate procedural steps.”
Link to the article: https://sozosfera.pl/prawo/jedna-decyzja-srodowiskowa-kilka-organow/
Wolters Kluwer publishes a book entitled “Orzecznictwo w sprawach podatkowych. Edycja 2018” (Case law in tax matters. 2018 Edition) containing important and controversial judgments that were issued in 2017, of key importance for the practice of applying tax law. The authors attempt to take a critical look at essential judgments issued by the Polish and the EU judiciary. Andrzej Ladziński, esq., is one of the authors of the publication.
Financial penalties are one of main sanctions for non-compliance with environmental requirements. The legislator uses different terminology to determine them, calling them a fine, an administrative pecuniary penalty or an increased fee. Marta Banasiak takes a closer look at fundamental differences between them by elaborating thereon in an article for Sozosfera.pl.
“Considering the maximum possible amount of administrative sanctions and the very addressee of the obligation, a potential analysis of these issues should be carried out when making decisions in the area of commercial transactions in which an enterprise is the subject, since it is impossible to a priori eliminate the risk of such an obligation being passed on to the successor in law.” – says Marta Banasiak.
Link to the article: https://sozosfera.pl/prawo/kary-finansowe-w-ochronie-srodowiska
The Supreme Administrative Court in its judgment of 20 February 2018, in the case with reference number II OSK 1949/17, established that the content of the local zoning plan determines the category of areas, to which plots belong, on which measurements of noise generated by the mine were made. This judgment is commented by a legal counsel from GWW, Dorota Chramęga, on portalsamorządowy.pl: “In other words, the court of appeal emphasized that in the situation covered by the regulation of Article 115a (1) of the Act of 27 April 2001 on Environmental Protection Law (i.e. determination by the environmental protection body, on the basis of its own measurements, measurements made by a voivodeship inspector for environmental protection or measurements of an entity obliged to make them, that permissible noise levels are exceeded outside a plant as a result of its activity), the body deciding on the permissible noise level generated by a given plant is to follow the contents of the local zoning plan”.
A broader commentary on this judgment can be found by clicking the link: https://www.portalsamorzadowy.pl/ochrona-srodowiska/ile-halasu-moze-emitowac-przemysl-nsa-zabral-glos,118511.html
