A controversial new windfall tax on fuel companies, pushed through parliament in a rushed procedure, has been met with scathing criticism from constitutional experts at the University of Warsaw. They argue the law violates multiple constitutional principles, including the ban on retroactive taxation and the right to property, with one professor calling it a “factual confiscation” of up to 79% of profits.
The law, passed on July 3, 2026, imposes a one-time 60% tax on “excess profits” earned by companies producing or trading liquid fuels between March 1 and December 31, 2026. Combined with the standard 19% corporate income tax (CIT), the total tax burden reaches 79% of eligible profits. According to the Ministry of Finance, the tax will affect approximately 20-30 entities. The government argues the measure is needed to compensate for budget revenue losses from the now-expired fuel price relief package, triggered by the escalation of the Middle East conflict.
Constitutional violations and retroactive taxation
Prof. Ryszard Piotrowski, a constitutional law expert from the University of Warsaw, lists six constitutional breaches. He stresses that the law applies retroactively to profits earned from March 1, 2026, while the law itself will only enter into force on August 1, 2026. – The ban on retroactive taxation in tax law is absolute. The cited “destabilization of world energy markets” is not an unforeseen event that justifies such a violation – said Prof. Piotrowski. He also points to the extremely short vacatio legis, which gives businesses no time to adapt, calling it a “trap” that undermines the principle of trust in the state.
Furthermore, the combined 79% tax rate violates the principle of proportionality. – The fiscal goal could have been achieved through less burdensome measures, such as administrative price controls, without violating the constitutional prohibition on retroactivity – added Prof. Piotrowski. He also highlighted discriminatory treatment: only 20-30 entities are targeted based on their “above-average financial results,” without reference to other sectors with similar profits. The professor warned that weakening the fuel sector’s investment capacity could ultimately harm Poland’s energy security and lead to greater budget losses than the tax is supposed to cover.
Rushed legislation and risk of confiscation
Dr. Jacek Zaleśny, a constitutional expert from the same university, emphasizes the speed of the legislative process. Although the government did not formally declare the bill urgent, it requested accelerated proceedings. The Sejm passed the law in three days. – This effectively meets the criteria of an urgent procedure, which is prohibited for tax laws – said Dr. Zaleśny. He also argues that the 79% tax rate undermines the very essence of property rights. – A combined tax of at least 79% effectively negates the right to derive benefits and dispose of property. This is a factual confiscation, akin to a forced contribution – he added.
Dr. Zaleśny further notes that the tax is harsher than the 75% rate applied to unrevealed income. – Treating legal economic activity more severely than hidden income is irrational and contradicts the principle of justice – he concluded. The law now awaits a decision from President Karol Nawrocki, who can sign it, veto it, or refer it to the Constitutional Tribunal.
Źródło: WNP.PL, Fot. PTWP
