The defeat of the tax office in the “donuts” case. The court decided on online payments

An anonymous online payment may be considered a donation – the Supreme Administrative Court ruled in a final judgment (reference number III FSK 113/26).

This decision may be of great importance for internet creators, streamers and people organizing fundraisers, because it calls into question the tax office’s current approach to money transferred without disclosing the donor’s data.

– This is a blow to the interpretation of the tax office that has been pushed for two years, according to which if it is not known who paid the money, there is no donation, and therefore a streamer, YouTuber or even a mother collecting money for her child’s treatment should pay PIT on every zloty received. After the Supreme Administrative Court’s judgment, small, anonymous support within the tax-free amount of PLN 5,733 may be tax-free again – explains Piotr Juszczyk, Chief Tax Advisor at inFakt.

At the same time, the expert emphasizes that the Supreme Administrative Court’s ruling should not be interpreted as an automatic tax exemption for all payments made to creators or organizers of collections.

The tax authorities previously approached the matter differently

The dispute over the treatment of online payments has been ongoing since 2024. In the issued individual interpretations, the tax administration assumed that in order to be considered a donation, it was necessary to establish the identity of the person transferring the money.

The problem concerned, among others, payments signed only with a nickname, login or e-mail address. This is how many donation and online fundraising platforms operate. According to the previous interpretation of the tax office, such money was not supposed to be donations, but income subject to PIT.

– Donations marked only with a nickname, login or e-mail, which is how most platforms supporting donations and online collections work, were not supposed to be donations, but income subject to PIT. This interpretation hit not only internet creators, but also the organizers of charity collections, including parents collecting money for children’s treatment, notes Piotr Juszczyk.

According to the advisor, this approach focused too much on formalities. In practice, it could lead to different treatment of identical payments solely due to the way the donor was identified.

– It turned out that the same hundred-zloty donation from a benevolent person was tax-free if the donor signed it, and taxed PIT if he clicked the “anonymous” option. The method of operation of the payment platform would determine the tax, not the essence of the activity itself, says Juszczyk.

The court indicated what really determines a donation

The NSA did not agree with this approach. In the court’s opinion, the existence of a donation is determined by the nature of the activity itself, and not by whether the person giving the money disclosed his data.

To conclude a donation, an agreement is required regarding its subject, benefits at the expense of the donor’s property and its gratuitous nature. The mere fact that the recipient does not know the name and surname of the person making the payment does not rule out the possibility of qualifying the payment as a donation.

– An anonymous payment meets these conditions. The court also noted that in the realities of the digital economy, “anonymity” usually means only the non-disclosure of data publicly, and not the absence of a specific person who made the payment – explains Juszczyk.

The expert points out that this approach better suits the realities of online payments.

– A donation is a contract, not a form. There is no requirement anywhere in the regulations that the donor must introduce himself to the recipient, the expert points out.

What about the limit of PLN 5,733?

For people receiving small payments, the limit for donations from people in tax group III remains important. Donations from one person are tax-free up to the amount of PLN 5,733, with the limit taking into account total payments from the same donor over five years.

Only if this amount is exceeded does the surplus have to be settled. In such a case, progressive rates of 12, 16 and 20 percent apply, and the donation must be reported to the tax office on form SD-3 within a month.

– The key thing is that we calculate the limit separately for each donor. In the case of donations or collections, we are usually talking about dozens or hundreds of people contributing a few, a dozen or several dozen zlotys. The probability that one and the same person will donate more than PLN 5,733 to the creator within five years is small in practice. Therefore, after the Supreme Administrative Court’s judgment, the vast majority of such payments should remain exempt from tax, notes Juszczyk.

However, donation can be a payment

However, the Supreme Administrative Court’s ruling does not mean that every payment received by a streamer or YouTuber can be treated as a donation. The key is whether the person giving the money does so without expecting anything in return.

The court did not decide whether the complainant’s activity should be treated as a business activity. This means that in certain situations, the tax office may still recognize the funds received as business-related income.

– The boundary is easy to name, although not always easy to apply: the donation must be selfless. If, in return for the payment, the viewer receives anything, e.g. access to additional content, a distinction on the stream, a place in the ranking, advertising for his brand – this is not a donation, but payment for a service. And this is subject to PIT and sometimes also VAT. Similarly, when collecting payments is an organized, permanent earnings model included in the business activity – explains the Chief Tax Advisor of inFakt.

Documentation can prevent problems

After the judgment, creators and organizers of fundraisers should still ensure that the nature of the money received is properly documented. It is particularly important to demonstrate that the payment was voluntary and did not involve any consideration.

– First of all, make sure that the regulations and description of the collection are clear, which make it clear that contributions are voluntary and do not involve any mutual benefit. Secondly, maintaining the history of donations from the platform is the best proof that no single donor has exceeded the limit. Thirdly, in the case of larger, regular amounts or payments related to business activity, it is worth consulting, for example, a tax advisor – suggests Juszczyk.

The Supreme Administrative Court’s judgment is a favorable signal for people using online collections and donations, but we still have to wait for a change in tax office practice. Therefore, in the case of larger or regular deposits, it is still worth being careful and carefully analyzing their nature.