Ai Tax Report. PiS wants revolution 3.0 in taxes. VAT refund in a week, what about the officials?
“Economy first: economy and energy” is the title of the panel at which Janusz Kowalski and Jacek Sasin will present the “Ai TAX Report” on Friday evening. As they emphasize on the X portal, this will be the first Tax Administration 3.0 strategy in Europe.
This may be a revolution, because it is about switching the current tax system to the 3.0 model. How? By automating and reporting current data instead of historical data. As MP Janusz Kowalski says, such a model is currently promoted by the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development), although no country has implemented it yet. In this model, tax processes are maximally automated and integrated with the taxpayer's accounting programs.
A large investment should bring large “profits”
According to PiS MPs, Poland faces the need for a fundamental reconstruction of the tax system, because the current one is exhausting its possibilities. The changes, to be implemented gradually over three years, would provide:
— additional revenues to the state budget (approx. PLN 7.2 billion annually) from VAT and CIT sealing,
— economy of savings (approx. PLN 8.2 billion annually), by reducing bureaucracy and simplifying payments.
However, changing the system would first be a one-time cost to the budget, and a considerable one at that. It is necessary to spend approximately PLN 7.7 billion to change the system, but the investment would pay off in just over a year.
In the new model, taxes are to be “paid” automatically, interpretations will be issued by the system, and humans will only verify them (the right not to be subject to decisions based solely on automation). However, such a change requires the introduction of guarantees for taxpayers. And these are not the only risks associated with the transition to tax model 3.0.
Read also: Car leasing. What tax benefits does it offer and what will change from 2026? We explain
What does PiS want to change in taxes?
The “Ai TAX Report” report has as many as 111 pages. However, his basic vision is to create a “Strong state. Simple taxes. Less bureaucracy.” The changes would apply to both the tax administration and taxpayers.
The aim, as Members point out, is so that the tax “settles itself” in the background of the activity. The entrepreneur would focus on running the company, and the ERP system would automatically prepare a settlement proposal for approval with one click.
Taxpayers would move from manual reporting to automation.
The tax administration would prepare a settlement proposal (VAT, PIT, CIT) based on data available in the system (e.g. from KSeF, ZUS, and optionally – with the taxpayer's consent – from bank accounts), and the taxpayer or his accountant would only verify and accept the proposal with one click in his accounting or ERP system (enterprise resource planning, i.e. enterprise resource planning). Thanks to this, as the report shows, the time needed for tax settlements would be shortened by 90%. — from three hours to 15 minutes in the case of sole proprietorships (JDG).
Additionally, accounting systems would communicate with public systems using an open API. Another element was the implementation of the “payment request” (tax) standard, which would speed up payments and eliminate errors when entering data for transfers. Once the settlement is accepted, the taxpayer's system would automatically generate a structured payment request, which may include taxes (PIT, VAT, CIT) and ZUS contributions.
The effect of the change to the 3.0 model would be: acceleration of VAT refunds, less control and legal certainty.
The authors of the report also propose the introduction of a statutory guarantee of a 12-month period for preparation for changes affecting company systems (the so-called digital vacatio legis).
How would tax administration change?
The changes, and large ones, would also cover the tax administration (KAS and MF).
Tax Administration would build a tax platform 3.0, which would replace the current numerous systems operating in the tax office. The authors also want to the administration published official and unambiguous tax interpretations, and artificial intelligence (AI) performed risk analysis and was the core of automation. In such a system, taxpayers would receive certain guarantees (these would be provided by the “Digital Taxpayer's Charter”). Apart from that each automatic decision made by artificial intelligence (e.g. selecting for an inspection, withholding a refund) would have to be explained to the taxpayer. Key decisions would always have to be verified by an official (human). He would make the final decision, and the taxpayer would have the right to request human intervention.
As the authors of the report point out, such a system would also have to be compliant with EU law, including the AI Act. In addition, the state would have to have control over the technology (technological sovereignty), provide open API (data exchange between the tax office system and companies' ERP systems) and cloud neutrality (the system architecture would be technologically neutral, enabling easy transfer of systems between cloud providers).
It's not that simple. Risks of the 3.0 model of tax administration
Harnessing artificial intelligence and automation to tax administration activities would also carry significant risks, admit the authors of the report. They also indicate how to limit them.
First of all, there is risk loss of technological sovereignty and supplier dependence. Of course it shows up too risk of cybersecurity and leakage sensitive financial data. This requires strong data encryption and control.
Another risk is related to artificial intelligence. Malfunctioning AI models may lead to unfair decisions and discrimination, which is why human supervision is necessary.
In turn, to limit social resistance, full transparency of the operation of algorithms and the implementation of the “Charter of Digital Taxpayer Rights” are necessaryguaranteeing, among others, the right to human intervention and explanation of an automatic decision.
Small and medium-sized enterprises should also benefit from the National Digital Support Program (e.g. receive vouchers for software and training).
The risk for officials of the National Tax Administration would be layoffs. The report only indicates increasing efficiency and financial savings resulting from automation, which “leads to a profound organizational change.” So it does not mention layoffs, but officials would have to retrain – instead of auditing taxpayers, they would have to deal with data analysis and system control.
As the report shows, the implementation of the 3.0 model requires: deep organizational change inside KAS. The change in the nature of work also means the need to invest in retraining programs employees. The report also recommends strategic investment in development of internal competences in the National Treasury and the Ministry of Finance.
