Alternative Methods for Resolving Tax Disputes in Poland – The Odds of Success

H. Filipczyk
{"title":"Alternative Methods for Resolving Tax Disputes in Poland – The Odds of Success","authors":"H. Filipczyk","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2759842","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In October 2015 the Polish government adopted the \"Directional Assumptions of the New Tax Ordinance” drafted by the Committee for Codification of the General Tax Law – a body of experts appointed by the Prime Minister of the Republic of Poland. The Assumptions now serve the basis for drafting the new Tax Ordinance, to enter into force in 2018. The Assumptions propose to establish procedural grounds for consensual, i.e. premised on an agreement between parties to the dispute, forms of tax disputes prevention and resolution – ADR ex ante (consultative pre- and post-filing procedure; cooperative compliance program) and ex post (settlement procedure used once a dispute has arisen; third-party mediation). This part of the project, and quite revolutionary innovation in the Polish tax procedure it puts forward, have raised much concern among the tax administration, tax judges and academia. Serious doubts and reservations over the possibility to ‘negotiate taxes’ have been expressed both officially, i.e. within the consultation process, and in informal communication between external stakeholders and members of the Committee. The purpose of the paper is twofold. First, it seeks to explain the main policy problems the Committee had to solve while developing the proposal. Second, it purports to discuss normative objections that have been raised by stakeholders against the proposal and to pinpoint possible practical difficulties which can hamper its implementation and operation. The paper unfolds as follows. After providing the background information on the Committee’s work (in section 1) and on the current status of tax ADR in Poland (in section 2) the paper outlines the main policy dilemmas related to ADR that the Committee faced in the process of drafting the Assumptions and sets out the main elements of the resulting ADR proposal (in section 3). Then it briefly presents consultation process of the proposal and feedback received in this process (section 4). Sections 5 and 6 – the core of the paper – discuss normative and non-normative (factual) obstacles to the implementation and successful operation of the proposal. As a final point, in section 7 the paper sketches a \"to do list\": non-exhaustive catalogue of supporting activities which can aid the successful – effective, efficient and fair – implementation of the proposal. The author is the member of the Committee responsible for the ADR proposal.","PeriodicalId":121229,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law: National eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Public Law: National eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2759842","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In October 2015 the Polish government adopted the "Directional Assumptions of the New Tax Ordinance” drafted by the Committee for Codification of the General Tax Law – a body of experts appointed by the Prime Minister of the Republic of Poland. The Assumptions now serve the basis for drafting the new Tax Ordinance, to enter into force in 2018. The Assumptions propose to establish procedural grounds for consensual, i.e. premised on an agreement between parties to the dispute, forms of tax disputes prevention and resolution – ADR ex ante (consultative pre- and post-filing procedure; cooperative compliance program) and ex post (settlement procedure used once a dispute has arisen; third-party mediation). This part of the project, and quite revolutionary innovation in the Polish tax procedure it puts forward, have raised much concern among the tax administration, tax judges and academia. Serious doubts and reservations over the possibility to ‘negotiate taxes’ have been expressed both officially, i.e. within the consultation process, and in informal communication between external stakeholders and members of the Committee. The purpose of the paper is twofold. First, it seeks to explain the main policy problems the Committee had to solve while developing the proposal. Second, it purports to discuss normative objections that have been raised by stakeholders against the proposal and to pinpoint possible practical difficulties which can hamper its implementation and operation. The paper unfolds as follows. After providing the background information on the Committee’s work (in section 1) and on the current status of tax ADR in Poland (in section 2) the paper outlines the main policy dilemmas related to ADR that the Committee faced in the process of drafting the Assumptions and sets out the main elements of the resulting ADR proposal (in section 3). Then it briefly presents consultation process of the proposal and feedback received in this process (section 4). Sections 5 and 6 – the core of the paper – discuss normative and non-normative (factual) obstacles to the implementation and successful operation of the proposal. As a final point, in section 7 the paper sketches a "to do list": non-exhaustive catalogue of supporting activities which can aid the successful – effective, efficient and fair – implementation of the proposal. The author is the member of the Committee responsible for the ADR proposal.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
解决波兰税务纠纷的其他方法-成功的几率
2015年10月,波兰政府通过了由一般税法编纂委员会起草的“新税收条例的方向性假设”,该委员会是由波兰共和国总理任命的专家机构。这些假设现在成为起草将于2018年生效的新税务条例的基础。假设建议建立协商一致的程序基础,即以争端各方之间的协议为前提,预防和解决税务争端的形式-事先协商的ADR(提交前和提交后协商程序);合作合规程序)和事后(纠纷发生后使用的解决程序);第三方中介)。该项目的这一部分,以及它在波兰税收程序中提出的相当革命性的创新,引起了税务管理部门、税务法官和学术界的极大关注。对于“协商税收”的可能性,无论是在正式磋商过程中,还是在外部利益相关者和委员会成员之间的非正式沟通中,都表达了严重的怀疑和保留意见。这篇论文的目的是双重的。首先,它试图解释委员会在拟订提案时必须解决的主要政策问题。其次,它旨在讨论利益相关者对该提案提出的规范性反对意见,并指出可能阻碍其实施和操作的实际困难。论文展开如下。提供背景信息后,委员会的工作(第一节)和税收现状的ADR在波兰(2节)本文概述了主要政策委员会面对困境与ADR在起草的过程中假设和设定了主要元素产生的ADR的提议(第三节)。然后简要提出了协商过程中收到的建议和反馈这一过程(4节)。部分5和6的核心论文-讨论规范和非规范(事实)障碍的实施和成功运作的建议。最后,在第7节中,该文件草拟了一份“待做事项清单”:可帮助成功、有效、有效率和公平地执行建议的支助活动的非详尽目录。作者是负责ADR提案的委员会成员。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Smart Metering Interoperability Issues and Solutions: Taking Inspiration from Other Ecosystems and Sectors COVID-19 Vaccination and Data Protection Issues: A European Comparative Study With Focuses on France, Germany, Belgium, and Switzerland Costituzionalismo e diversità etnica: il caso della Bosnia-Erzegovina (Constitutionalism and Ethnic Diversity: The Case of Bosnia and Herzegovina) Judicial Assistants in Europe – A Comparative Analysis Connected Italy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1