After a series of refusals to issue advance rulings by the Head of the National Revenue Administration (concerning contributions in kind and quick sales), the impression may have been created that the tax authorities perceive family foundations solely as a risky optimisation vehicle. However, an analysis of the practice of the Director of the National Tax Information Service shows that in typical, economically justified models, the foundation benefits from the CIT exemption and can safely perform its succession function.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Long-term rental of real estate<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Interpretation of 17 December 2024, ref. no. 0114-KDIP2-1.4010.667.2024.1.KW \u2013 The Director of the National Tax Information Service confirmed that the income of a family foundation from the long-term lease of a residential house will be exempt from CIT (Article 6(1)(25) of the CIT Act), as it falls within the permitted scope of activities (Article 5 of the Family Foundation Act) and does not meet the negative conditions of Article 6(8) of the CIT Act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The key factor was that the lease was residential in nature and not commercial for the related beneficiary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
DKIS said more, a family foundation that leases a flat on a long-term basis to another taxpayer (e.g. a limited liability company) will not suffer any consequences if the tenant then sublets it \u201con a daily basis\u201d. The foundation\u2019s income from the lease will be tax-free.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Short-term rental of real estate<\/p>\n\n\n\n
0111-KDIB1-2.4010.585.2024.2.EJ (16 December 2024) \u2013 The Director of the National Tax Information Service confirms, in principle, the CIT exemption for FR income from rental\/lease, subject to the exclusions in Article 6(7)-(8) of the CIT Act. The interpretation emphasises that the regulations do not narrow the concept of \u201crental\u201d (the dispute over short-term rental arose later from practice), so negative premises (beneficiary\/founder\/related parties and use in business) are key.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
0111-KDIB1-2.4010.53.2024.1.ANK (14 March 2024) \u2013 confirmation of CIT exemption for leasing to unrelated entities, with the proviso that leasing to related entities used in business activities is excluded from the exemption (Article 6(8) of the CIT Act).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Case law (courts) \u2013 Provincial Administrative Court in Gda\u0144sk, 19 June 2024, I SA\/Gd 219\/24 and Provincial Administrative Court in Bydgoszcz, 9 April 2025, I SA\/Bd 107\/25: short-term leasing falls within the scope of \u201cleasing\u201d under Article 5(1)(2) of the CIT Act and may benefit from CIT exemption, provided that<\/p>\n\n\n\n
the conditions of Article 6(8) of the CIT Act (beneficiary\/founder\/related parties \u2013 economic purpose) apply.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Note:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Director of the National Revenue Information Service is also restrictive towards short-term rentals (Interpretation of 9 May 2025, 0111-KDIB1-2.4010.148.2025.2.MK, in which he stated: \u201c(\u2026) it is therefore not possible to agree with the assertion that short-term rental of residences falls within the scope of activities permitted under Article 5(1)(2) of the CIT Act and that income from short-term rentals is exempt from corporate income tax\u201d but courts have begun to agree with taxpayers that \u201crental is rental\u201d. The exemptions from Article 6(8) of the CIT Act are key<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u00d8 This is an important distinction: the problem is the beneficiary\u2019s business, not the rental relationship itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Loans to subsidiaries<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Interpretation of the Director of the National Tax Information Service 0111-KDIB1-2.4010.282.2024.2.AK (09.08.2024) \u2013 granting loans by a family foundation is a permitted activity (Article 5(1)(5) of the Family Foundations Act). A loan granted by a family foundation to entities other than those specified in Article 5(1)(5) of the Family Foundation Act as beneficiaries \u2013 for any period of time shall not constitute hidden profits within the meaning of Article 24q(1a)(6) of the CIT Act and, therefore, there shall be no tax liability on hidden profits in the form of taxation of the loan amount granted to such entities by the family foundation at a tax rate of 15%.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This confirms that financial activities within the permitted scope are acceptable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The explanatory memorandum to the Family Foundation Act emphasised that the CIT exemption is intended to enable tax-neutral accumulation of assets and the performance of succession functions. However, the Ministry of Finance has emphasised from the outset that the restrictions (Article 6(6)-(8) of the CIT Act) are intended to protect against the \u201ctransfer\u201d of assets solely for the purpose of avoiding tax.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This approach is reflected in practice: ordinary succession models (leases, loans, capital investments) are accepted, and only purely tax schemes (contributions and quick disposals) are refused a protective opinion by the Head of the National Revenue Administration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Against the background of existing interpretations, it is particularly important that the legislator itself recognises the need to clarify the framework for the activities of family foundations. The latest draft amendments to the Family Foundation Act provide, among other things, for:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
exclusion of short-term rentals (e.g. condo-hotels) from the list of permitted activities, which confirms the direction presented in interpretation 0111-KDIB1-2.4010.148.2025.2.MK,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
clarification that the rental of assets to beneficiaries, founders or related entities always excludes exemption if business activity is conducted on the premises,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
possible restrictions on granting loans \u2013 the legislator is considering limiting them to subsidiaries of foundations in order to avoid \u201ccascade\u201d financing,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
introduction of the principle of proportional limitation of exemption \u2013 if a foundation conducts both permitted and prohibited activities in parallel, CIT would be calculated only on the \u201cprohibited\u201d part, and not on the total income,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
additional anti-abuse regulations to limit the creation of optimisation structures that are formally compliant with Article 5 of the Act but in fact serve only tax purposes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Such changes show that the use of CIT exemptions in family foundations will require even greater attention and ongoing monitoring of the practices of the National Revenue Administration in the near future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Many law firms (including ID Advisory, LTCA, TPA) indicate in their comments that family foundations remain one of the most effective succession tools. Examples of favourable interpretations build confidence that, with the right structure design:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u00b7 the foundation does not pay CIT on current income,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u00b7 payments to beneficiaries from group \u201c0\u201d are tax neutral,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u00b7 risks can be controlled by avoiding \u201cartificial\u201d contributions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A family foundation is not a vehicle for tax optimisation in isolation from business, but it is still a genuinely beneficial tool.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u00b7 On the positive side \u2013 numerous interpretations confirming CIT exemption in typical situations (residential leases, loans, investments).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u00b7 On the downside \u2013 refusals to issue protective opinions by the Head of the National Revenue Administration concerning \u201ccontribution + sale\u201d schemes, which the tax authorities treat as circumvention of the law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For entrepreneurs, this means one thing: the foundation works, but it requires common sense and economic logic. When designing structures, it is worth basing them on real succession needs, and not solely on tax calculations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n