Rules for the Taxation of Seafarers
A seafarer performing salaried work outside Poland and earning income from such work without the intermediary of a withholding agent is obliged to pay advance income tax at a rate of 12% of such income (a higher rate may also be applied).
The deadline for paying the advance falls on the 20th day of the month following the month in which the seafarer returned to Poland. Where the advance payment deadline falls after the end of the tax year, the tax due is payable before the deadline for filing the annual return. Therefore, the seafarer is obliged to pay advances on personal income tax without being called upon by the tax authority. This is a statutory obligation incumbent on the taxpayer.
It is possible for the taxpayer to be released from this obligation following the tax authority’s acceptance of an application for limitation of advance tax payments (colloquially known as an “abolition application”). This entitlement derives from Art. 22 § 2a of the Tax Ordinance Act.
Abolition relief is available where the double taxation treaty concluded by Poland with the other state provides for the proportional credit method. It should be noted that Poland has acceded to the Multilateral Convention (“MLI”), which modifies many double taxation treaties. It is therefore necessary to verify whether and how the MLI affects the treaty – this is set out in the so-called synthesised texts.
Where Poland has not concluded a treaty for the avoidance of double taxation (a “treaty-free” situation), the proportional credit method likewise applies to income earned in such a state.
Source State for Income and Offshore Units
For seafarers working on specialist units (FPSOs, FSOs, cable-laying vessels, research vessels), the question of determining the source state becomes additionally complex. As confirmed by the NSA in its judgment of 29 January 2026 (II FSK 702/23), if a vessel is not operated in international transport, Art. 14(3) of the Polish-Norwegian Convention does not apply. The source state is then not Norway (the shipowner’s registered office) but the state in whose territorial waters, on whose continental shelf or in whose exclusive economic zone the unit actually operates – e.g., Ghana, Brazil, Angola or Guyana.
This has significant consequences: if Poland has not concluded a double taxation treaty with that state (a treaty-free situation), the income is taxed under the proportional credit method – but abolition relief is available only in respect of the portion of income on which tax has actually been paid abroad (general tax ruling of the Minister of Finance No. DD4.8201.1.2019). In situations covered by a tax convention, however, this question is disputed – the NSA in its judgment of 15 December 2025 (II FSK 785/22, seven-judge panel) held that actual payment of tax abroad does not condition the application of the treaty or entitlement to the relief.
A separate problem arises where the seafarer relies on a convention with the state of the vessel’s effective management (e.g., the United Kingdom or Norway) but is unable to demonstrate that any tax liability arises in that state. The WSA in Gdańsk in its judgment of 4 February 2026 (I SA/Gd 935/25) held that the absence of a conflict of taxing claims precludes the application of the treaty – this position, however, remains in tension with the NSA’s thesis in II FSK 785/22. The divergence requires individual assessment in each case, taking into account the specific convention and facts.
PIT Exemption (Art. 21(1)(23c)) vs. Abolition Relief (Art. 27g) – Which Route to Choose?
Polish tax law provides two separate instruments available to a seafarer working abroad. The choice between them is of critical importance – particularly when filing an application for limitation of advance PIT payments.
Art. 21(1)(23c) of the PIT Act provides a full PIT exemption, requiring the cumulative satisfaction of stringent conditions: an EU/EEA flag, carriage of cargo or passengers in international shipping, a minimum of 183 working days in the year, and a certificate under Art. 21(35). Art. 27g of the PIT Act provides abolition relief – it does not exempt income from tax but allows the deduction of the difference resulting from the application of a less favourable settlement method.
The WSA in Gdańsk in its judgment of 18 February 2026 (I SA/Gd 951/25) demonstrated how costly a mistake in the choice of legal basis can be. A seafarer whose Cyprus-flagged vessel operated in international shipping on behalf of a UK-managed enterprise relied solely on Art. 21(1)(23c) but failed to demonstrate the probability that its conditions were met. When, at the appeal stage, he attempted to “switch” to abolition relief under Art. 27g, the court held that the taxpayer’s application defines the scope of the proceedings and that a change of legal basis at the appeal stage is inadmissible.
The choice of route should therefore be carefully considered before the application is filed – taking into account the vessel’s flag, the shipowner’s registered office, the applicable tax convention, and the documentation available.
Robert Nogacki is a Polish attorney at law (radca prawny), the founder and managing partner of Kancelaria Prawna Skarbiec (Skarbiec Law Firm), which has operated continuously since 2006.
The law is equal for everyone, but the parties rarely are: on one side stands an organization with time, money, and lawyers, on the other a person with one business, one nest egg, and one life.
Clients rarely come to him with a legal problem. They come with a problem that also has a legal side: an audit that began with a single invoice, money entrusted to someone who has disappeared, a company that has to be passed on before it is too late. Most such matters are decided long before the first letter is written, in decisions made without asking and in deadlines nobody remembered. So he begins by asking how the client got here, not what the client should have done.
He advises entrepreneurs and families from more than a dozen countries, including those whose accounts the tax office has just seized and who do not know what to do tomorrow morning. He defends them in tax audits, customs and fiscal inspections, disputes with the tax authorities, and criminal tax proceedings. He represents victims of investment fraud and Ponzi schemes. He helps families set up family foundations and plan succession, so that a life’s work outlasts a single generation.
Not every case can be won. Every case can be run so that the client knows where they stand. Since 2006 he has represented the victims in the WGI case (Warszawska Grupa Inwestycyjna, the Warsaw Investment Group), one of the longest criminal cases in the history of the Polish financial market, because some things must not be left half finished, even when they take two decades. In the case of the collapsed cryptocurrency exchange Zonda (Zondacrypto, operated by BB Trade Estonia OÜ), he represents several hundred victims in the criminal investigation conducted by Poland’s National Prosecutor’s Office and in the Estonian bankruptcy proceedings.
Kancelaria Prawna Skarbiec is listed in the rankings of Poland’s largest tax advisory firms published by Dziennik Gazeta Prawna and Rzeczpospolita, and it is a four-time recipient (2015 to 2018) of the European Medal awarded by the Business Centre Club and the European Economic and Social Committee. Robert Nogacki publishes regularly, in the press and on the firm’s website, for people who have a problem rather than a law degree, because a legal opinion the client cannot understand protects only the lawyer.
He believes that the best legal advice is the kind that means the client never has to appear in court.
