A business approached the National Tax Information (KIS) requesting an interpretation of the tax consequences of providing visualisations of structured invoices outside KSeF.
The position of the KIS Director was taken by a GmbH (Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung) headquartered in Switzerland, registered in Poland as an active VAT taxpayer.
"The applicant requests confirmation of the correctness of their position that PDF visualisations issued and sent to contractors as described in the future event description cannot be considered so‑called empty invoices referred to in Article 108(1) of the VAT Act, and therefore there is no obligation to pay the VAT indicated in them," we read in the Legal Information System LEX.
The Director of the National Tax Information left no doubt in this matter.
"Your doubts concern whether PDF visualisations issued and sent to contractors can be considered so‑called empty invoices referred to in Article 108(1) of the Act, and therefore there is no obligation to pay the VAT indicated in them," we read in the response of the KIS Director.
It turns out that the individual interpretation with reference number: 0114-KDIP1-2.4012.88.2026.1.RST has caused great confusion among Polish businesses, who began to fear that in the event of making even the smallest mistake they would have to pay tax twice – in their view – for the same invoice.
"The introduction of mandatory KSeF was meant to simplify life for entrepreneurs, yet the Director’s interpretations can drive thousands of companies into gigantic financial trouble. The innocent and convenient practice of sending invoice visualisations in PDF format can generate an obligation for 'double tax payment' if the data on the visualisation are not an exact reflection of the structured KSeF invoice in XML format," notes Michał Płatek, legal counsel and tax advisor.
Sending an invoice visualisation in PDF form risky?
In the question to KIS the entrepreneur wanted to confirm whether a visualisation that differs in any way from the structured invoice could be treated as a separate document. As legal counsel and tax advisor Michał Płatek explains, according to the Director’s interpretation this can happen.
"Such a PDF visualisation that differs from the original XML format can be regarded as a separate (competing) invoice, which has entered economic circulation. According to Article 108 of the VAT Act, if an entrepreneur sends clients PDF files that differ from the XML files registered in KSeF, the treasury will treat them as independent documents and order payment of the VAT indicated in them a second time," warns Michał Płatek.
Risk for entrepreneurs
As tax advisors say, to avoid problems after issuing a PDF visualisation, it should be clearly marked as a visualisation. A simple way to provide an invoice to a contractor is also to give them the QR code generated in KSeF, which does not carry the risk of an error that may arise when creating a PDF visualisation.
However, if the entrepreneur still decides to issue a document in PDF visualisation form, they must prepare for it appropriately.
"For large businesses this means a review of ERP systems for data generated in visualisations and the risk of revealing trade secrets. Another danger concerns small firms that use popular invoicing software and lack the resources to verify whether the generated PDF files match the XML files sent to KSeF," states Michał Płatek, legal counsel and tax advisor.
See also: Krakow tax office checks the use of company cars. Those who "cut" VAT may be surprised
