Poland - Market Insights

Cross-border enforcement of public law claims in the Polish legal system

Introduction

Contemporary legal transactions, shaped by the global trade and cross-border exchange of goods and services, have compelled the Polish legislator to develop effective mechanisms for enforcing public law obligations, even if they have an international dimension. Poland, as a significant participant in the single market, is a jurisdiction where cross-border enforcement of public law claims intersects with domestic administrative practice and the specific nature of national enforcement procedures.

Cooperation between European Union Member States, as well as third countries, in this area is of strategic importance. It involves both Polish public administration authorities providing assistance to competent authorities of other states and Poland requesting analogous support from abroad. These mechanisms protect the financial interests of Poland and the European Union and, where applicable, partner third countries, and support the functioning of the single market by preventing the creation of “safe havens” for debtors evading obligations in the state of origin.

Legal and institutional architecture of mutual assistance in Poland

The model of cooperation is based on Council Directive 2010/24/EU of 16 March 2010 concerning mutual assistance for the recovery of claims relating to taxes, duties and other measures (OJ L 84, 31.3.2010) as well as the Polish Act of 11 October 2013 on mutual assistance in the recovery of taxes, customs duties and other monetary claims (ustawa o wzajemnej pomocy (u.w.p.); consolidated text: Journal of Laws of 2023, item 2009, as amended). The u.w.p. fully implements Directive 2010/24/EU and has replaced earlier, fragmented provisions formerly embedded in enforcement legislation. At the same time, domestic enforcement rules — in particular the Act of 17 June 1966 on enforcement proceedings in administration (ustawa o postępowaniu egzekucyjnym w administracji (u.p.e.a.); consolidated text: Journal of Laws of 2025, item 132, as amended) — remains autonomous as regards the manner of enforcing public monetary claims. Recovery and securing of claims of EU Member States and, within statutory limits, third countries is conducted under u.p.e.a., supported as necessary by the Code of Administrative Procedure (Act of 14 June 1960 — consolidated text: Journal of Laws of 2025, item 1691) and the Tax Ordinance Act (Ordynacja podatkowa; Act of 29 August 1997 — consolidated text: Journal of Laws of 2025, item 111, as amended).

The Minister of Finance plays a central role, supervising implementation, concluding international arrangements and coordinating relations with the European Commission. Operational communication in mutual assistance matters is carried out by the Central Liaison Office (Centralne Biuro Łącznikowe (CBŁ)), currently designated as the Tax Chamber in Poznań. The CBŁ verifies and forwards requests for assistance, provides translations and prepares foreign enforcement titles that serve as the basis for actions by local enforcement authorities (e.g. heads of tax offices). It thus acts as an intermediary between foreign authorities and the Polish enforcement apparatus, ensuring both formal correctness and enforceability of cross-border claims.

Types of enforcement titles and currency issues

The enforcement title (tytuł wykonawczy) is the key instrument for initiating and conducting administrative enforcement proceedings. Its structure and typology are designed to ensure efficiency, transparency and legal certainty. Polish law distinguishes several categories of enforcement titles: original, repeated, subsequent, amended, consolidated (jednolity) and foreign enforcement titles.

The original enforcement title (pierwotny tytuł wykonawczy) is the first title issued in a given enforcement case and confirms the existence and enforceability of a public law obligation. As a rule, where the underlying substantive act remains unchanged and no specific procedural circumstances arise, the original title remains the sole document authorising enforcement.

In cross-border recovery, two categories are of particular importance: the consolidated (uniform) enforcement title (jednolity tytuł wykonawczy) and the foreign enforcement title (zagraniczny tytuł wykonawczy).

Under Article 1a, point 4c, u.p.e.a., a consolidated enforcement title is a document of a European Union Member State within the meaning of Article 3(4) u.w.p. It is a document issued by an enforcement authority or a Member State, attached to a request for recovery of monetary claims collected by the Republic of Poland, a Member State or on their behalf. The consolidated title transforms an obligation established in another Member State into a directly enforceable basis in Poland, without recognition proceedings or the granting of a Polish writ of execution (klauzula wykonalności). Pursuant to Article 74 u.w.p., it is not subject to approval, supplementation or replacement by a Polish authority, reflecting the principle of mutual trust and the need for effective cross-border enforcement. This procedure applies only to cases between Member States of the European Union.

The foreign enforcement title, regulated primarily in Articles 101 and 102 u.w.p., is linked to assistance in recovery at the request of a foreign state (Member State or, within limits, a third country). Upon receipt of a request, the CBŁ prepares a foreign enforcement title (Article 101 u.w.p.), whose content should correspond to the original enforcement title issued abroad.

Article 102(2) u.w.p. specifies the mandatory elements of a foreign enforcement title, including:

• designation of the authority submitting the request;
• identification data of the debtor;
• specification of the type and amount of monetary claims expressed in Polish zloty (PLN) and of the period to which they relate;
• designation of the original enforcement title; and
• a clause submitting the title for administrative enforcement.

Administrative courts stress strict compliance with these requirements, as they safeguard the identity of the claim and the debtor’s rights.

A central practical issue is the currency of the claim. The foreign enforcement title must specify the type and amount of the claim in PLN. Case law — including the judgment of the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Olsztyn of 18 March 2015, case ref. I SA/Ol 78/15 — adopts a strict view: failure to indicate the amount in PLN precludes recognising the foreign enforcement title as consistent with the original title. The enforcement authority may not carry out currency conversions on its own; conversion must be effected by the CBŁ when drawing up the foreign enforcement title.

Catalogue of enforcement measures in cross-border practice

The effectiveness of cross-border recovery depends on the efficient use of enforcement measures provided under Polish law. When acting on foreign or consolidated enforcement titles, Polish authorities may apply the full range of administrative enforcement instruments laid down in the u.p.e.a.

Key measures include:

• Seizure of bank accounts.This is one of the most frequently used and effective measures, supported by advanced IT tools. Seizure occurs when the bank is served with a notice of seizure of the debtor’s receivable, resulting in an immediate freeze of funds held in accounts maintained by Polish banks, regardless of the state where the debt arose.
• Seizure of receivables from financial instruments and other property rights.Enforcement may extend to a broad range of rights, including receivables from tax overpayments or customs refunds. Information on anticipated tax refunds due to the debtor is transmitted by the CBŁ to the competent enforcement authority (e.g. the head of a tax office), enabling their effective seizure towards foreign arrears.
• Seizure of remuneration and social security benefits.This measure is particularly relevant where the debtor, despite arrears in another Member States or a third country, earns income or receives benefits in Poland.
• Securing of claims. Before enforcement is initiated, the authority may, at the request of a European Union Member State or a third country, take security measures to protect the creditor’s interests against dissipation of assets.

Enforcement measures undertaken remain effective even if the enforcement title is amended during the proceedings, ensuring continuity and procedural economy.

Reliefs in the repayment of recovered claims

A distinctive feature of the Polish system is the competence of enforcement authorities to grant reliefs in repayment of claims enforced on the basis of foreign titles. Under Article 71c u.p.e.a., a Polish enforcement authority may, on the debtor’s application, defer the payment deadline or allow payment in instalments.

This solution shifts decision making on the repayment schedule from the foreign creditor to the Polish enforcing authority. The provisions of the Tax Ordinance Act apply mutatis mutandis, requiring an assessment of the debtor’s economic situation in the Polish context, which may differ significantly from conditions in the requesting state or a third country. Granting such relief constitutes a statutory ground for suspending ongoing enforcement proceedings, offering the debtor a realistic opportunity to settle obligations in a less onerous manner, while maintaining protection of public law claims.

Conclusions

The cooperation model developed under Directive 2010/24/EU and the u.w.p. is designed to ensure a high level of effectiveness in the cross-border enforcement of public law claims. This objective extends not only to cooperation between EU Member States, but also, within statutory limits and where appropriate international instruments so provide, to cooperation with third countries. This is achieved through the broad material and personal scope of assistance, a strengthened institutional framework (particularly the role of the CBŁ and enforcement authorities) and a clarified catalogue of cooperation forms and participants’ rights and obligations.

At the same time, Polish enforcement legislation retains autonomy regarding the conduct of administrative enforcement, including the choice of enforcement measures, procedural modalities and safeguards available to debtors. This autonomy is nonetheless constrained by the need to ensure the effectiveness and uniform application of EU law, by international commitments binding Poland in relation to third countries and by the principle of mutual trust in cross‑border cooperation.