Legislative work on the draft Act on Personal Investment Accounts (OCI) has already passed the stage of collecting opinions and public consultations. Although the very idea of relief from the so-called Belka's tax was enthusiastically received, but the devil – as is usually the case – is in the details. We discuss subsequent opinions about the project prepared by officials that have appeared in the public domain.
The main objective of the proposed act, defined in the Regulatory Impact Assessment (IAS), is: activating Poles' savings, increasing their share in the capital market and providing financing for the Polish economy. It is crucial to create tax incentives that are simple and attractive to citizens.
The process of consulting regulations on OIC
There are regulations forged in the legislative processwhich is used at the government level (the so-called pre-parliamentary stage). opinions of key entities for the state's financial and legal system (e.g. KNF, BFG, ZUS etc.) and social consultations among capital market participants (SII, WSE, ZBP, etc.).
We have already informed about the demands, among others: the Association of Individual Investors (SII), the Warsaw Stock Exchange (GPW), the Chamber of Brokerage Houses (IDM) and the Polish Bank Association (BP). Both feedback mechanisms indicated the need to make limits more flexible and procedures simpler. However, another batch of comments, including a detailed opinion of the Office of the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (UKNF) and extensive positions of other market participants, e.g. the Chamber of Fund and Asset Management (IZFiA), throw new light on the degree of refinement of the government's proposal.
Dispersion in opinions
Analyzing the incoming documents, it is impossible not to notice a huge discrepancy in the level of detail of the analyses. By its nature, the opinion issued by bodies such as the Polish Financial Supervision Authority is highly technical, formalized and detailed. In turn, opinions during public consultations tend to be more general, focused on market effects in relation to the domain of the questioned entity.
In the case of OKI, however, these boundaries are blurred. While, for example, the Association of Stock Exchange Issuers (SEG), the WSE and BondSpot presented rather laconic documents, limited to supporting the idea and a few point-by-point commentsentities such as IDM, IZFiA and the Polish Chamber of Insurance have prepared powerful substantive studies. In some cases, they are as insightful as the supervisor's opinion.
OKI hailstorm from the Polish Financial Supervision Authority
But let's focus on opinion of the capital market supervisor, as key in the entire spectrum of collected comments. The Office of the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (PFSA) submitted a total of 50 comments on the draft act. Technical and editorial changes constitute approximately 35 comments (70%) – they concern clarification of definitions (e.g. securities account, broker), correction of incorrect references to articles or unification of terminology. These are changes necessary for legislative correctness, but they do not change the essence of the product.
Substantive comments seem to be more important, of which we counted 15 (30%). Although technical comments predominate numerically, the specific weight of substantive comments is so high that without taking them into account, the implementation of the objectives described in the RIA (activation of capital and support for the economy) would be at risk or even impossible. Analyzing the comments submitted by the Polish Financial Supervision Authority from the perspective of the objectives of the draft act, the most important are those relating to the construction of tax incentives, the feasibility of investments and the safety of market participants.
Risk of double taxation in OIC
The most serious accusation of the Polish Financial Supervision Authority concerns: doubts about the tax calculation algorithm. According to the project, the tax base is the sum of the value of assets and payments made, which in practice it means taxing the same money twice (once as cash, the second time as an asset purchased with it). The Polish Financial Supervision Authority proposes that only the average annual value of assets should be the basis, which will restore economic sense to investing in OKI.
Moreover, effective support for the Polish economy may be undermined by the provision providing preferences only for assets “denominated in Polish zloty”. The Polish Financial Supervision Authority rightly points out that this criterion is leaky – it allows investment in foreign companies (if their units are valued in PLN) and excludes Polish companies issuing instruments in foreign currencies. The supervisor proposes changing the criterion to “the issuer's registered office in the Republic of Poland”.
Misselling and lack of valorization
The supervisor also warns against the risk of the so-called misselling. The current project limits the application of the provisions on examining the customer's knowledge and experience. The PFSA demands the restoration of full protection standards under the MiFID directive. Another important note concerns no indexation of tax exemption limits (set at PLN 25,000 and PLN 100,000). Without automatic indexation mechanism inflation will gradually “eat” the real value of the relief.
We also draw attention to a technical error in the transfer regulations. The project talks about transferring “assets”, which is physically impossible in the case of investment fund units when changing institutions. The supervisor's suggestion aims to enable the transfer of funds obtained from the repurchase of units, following the example of IKE and IKZE solutions.
Although the Polish Financial Supervision Authority does not deny the very idea of activating savings, it indicates that the draft act in its current form includes: construction errorswhich require thorough reconstruction before coming into force. The position of the KNF Office can be summarized as: a warning against introducing a product that is legally inconsistent, risky for consumers and economically unprofitable.
Cannibalization of IKE and problems of funds
Like the Polish Financial Supervision Authority, IZFiA identified a critical error in the tax base calculation algorithm. In turn, BCC notes lack of analysis of the interaction between OIC and the third pension pillar and warns that OKI will lead to the “cannibalization” of IKE payments. Without mechanisms to connect these systems, the new account could weaken one of the key pillars of voluntary retirement savings by replacing long-term savings with short-term savings.
IZFiA experts also emphasize that the specificity of investment funds has been almost completely omitted. This applies in particular to the non-transferability of participation units mentioned by the Polish Financial Supervision Authority, which – unlike shares – must be cashed in when changing institutions. The draft in its current wording makes the provisions on transfer payments in this sector dead.
The need to introduce a tax limit and the silence of the Lord
Similarly to IZFiA, SEG (but also the Polish Financial Supervision Authority) also postulates
introduction of an upper tax rate limit (cap). The project links the tax rate with the NBP reference rate (without an upper limit). In a high interest rate environment, the tax could become prohibitivedestroying the incentive to save and introducing uncertainty about future burdens. It is also repeated that signals were previously given, e.g. by the WSE, suggestion regarding enabling investment in initial public offerings before stock exchange debuts.
Speaking of repeated comments, Let's draw attention once again to an error that could destroy the meaning of the entire OKI project. Both the Polish Financial Supervision Authority and the IZFiA drew attention to the content of Article 23 para. 2 and 3, which regulates the method of calculating the tax base. Adopting the proposed calculation method would lead to double taxation and a drastic tax overstatement, which would be in blatant contradiction with the idea of OIC.
In this context The attitude of the Polish Audit Oversight Agency (PANA) is surprising and requires delicate criticism.. Agency in a short letter informed that it did not submit any comments on the project. It is at least surprising that an institution bringing together experts in finance and financial auditing
did not notice a potential error in the tax algorithm, which was pointed out by other participants in the legislative processincluding the supervisor himself.
Lobbyists also contributed their two cents to the project. In the case of OKI, the comments come from an Estonian fintech Lightyear Europe AS, operating in Poland on the basis of the so-called passporting. Its main message is a protest against excluding foreign investment companies from offering Personal Investment Accounts.
Closing the market to foreign entities protects traditional, domestic institutions from competition. According to the lobbyist, the lack of pressure from modern, technological platforms (often offering lower fees) will make the costs of running OIC in Poland higherand the quality of services is lower. Lobbyists remind us that Swedish ISK accounts, on which OKI is modeled, are also offered by cross-border entities. By closing the market, the Polish project goes against the idea of the Capital Markets Union.
May the drafting of OIC regulations take longer?
The number and weight of the submitted comments show that the process of creating regulations regarding Personal Investment Accounts is of great importance for the broader market. This is not surprising, because for OKI to meet its goals – activating savings, increasing Poles' participation in the stock exchange and providing capital for the economy – all stakeholder groups must be involved in its creation: from supervisors, through financial institutions, to consumer protection organizations.
Unfortunately, the current state of the project indicates a number of “shortcomings” and errors in the design of the regulationswhich, if implemented in the proposed form, could effectively discourage both product suppliers and investors from using OKI. The need to remove them and analyze, for example, the impact of OIC on the products forming the third pillar of the pension system in Poland raises justified concerns that the legislative process will take much longer.
For the average saver, this may mean this:
we will have to wait much longer than originally announced for Belka's long-awaited tax relief under the new investment account. Let us recall that in accordance with the Regulatory Impact Assessment (IAS), the Ministry of Finance assumed that the fiscal effects on the budget would result from the introduction of OIC in mid-2026.
I dare say it won't work. Here's to hoping if work on OKI is actually extended, this time will be used to prepare project details that will meet the expectations of representatives of the broad market and, above all, ordinary Poles, who must give almost one fifth of their profits from savings and investments to the state.
