For many specialists — programmers, graphic designers, consultants or accountants — a sole proprietorship is simply a way of invoicing work performed for one regular client. This model has long been attractive in terms of tax and social security contributions, but it has always carried the risk that the authorities would treat it as disguised employment. Since 8 July 2026 this risk has become more real: the amended Act on the National Labour Inspectorate (Państwowa Inspekcja Pracy, PIP) has given inspectors tools that allow them to challenge a B2B contract more quickly. Below we explain what has changed and what the entrepreneur themselves — not only their client — should pay attention to.
What exactly the amendment to the PIP Act changed
The definition of an employment relationship has not changed — it still derives from Article 22 of the Labour Code, and the name of the signed contract is irrelevant if the work is actually performed as in a regular job. What is new are the inspectorate's means of action. If, during an inspection, the inspector concludes that a civil-law contract or a B2B contract has the features of an employment relationship, after hearing both parties they may issue an order to change the way the contract is performed or to conclude an employment contract. If the order is not complied with, the district labour inspector may issue an administrative decision confirming the existence of an employment relationship. Such a decision may be appealed to the labour court. The previous route has also been retained — a claim filed by the inspector to establish the existence of an employment relationship, which is particularly relevant where the effects of employment need to be established for an earlier period.
How an inspector recognises that B2B is in practice a regular job
The assessment is based on the combined presence of features typical of employment: personal performance of work of a specified type, subordination to the client's management, work performed at a place and time set by the client, and regular remuneration, with the economic risk borne by the client rather than the contractor. In practice, warning signs include rigid working hours imposed by the client, the need to obtain approval for leave, being part of the company's internal hierarchy on the same footing as employees, no possibility of using a subcontractor, and a fixed monthly amount regardless of results. None of these circumstances is decisive on its own, but taken together they may support classifying the cooperation as employment. It is worth remembering that similar criteria have long applied in personal income tax as well — Article 5b of the PIT Act excludes from business activity services performed under the client's direction, without bearing risk or liability towards third parties.
Why this also concerns the entrepreneur themselves
Most attention is paid to the consequences for clients, including fines, which the amendment has raised to as much as PLN 60,000. Yet reclassifying the cooperation as employment also has consequences for the person running the sole proprietorship. Remuneration from this cooperation ceases to be business income, which may undermine the chosen form of taxation, including the lump-sum tax (ryczałt) or the flat-rate tax, as well as costs already deducted and VAT reclaimed. The basis for social and health insurance changes, and consequently so do settlements with ZUS (the Polish Social Insurance Institution). The amendment also strengthens the exchange of information — PIP may use ZUS data and pass on its inspection findings to ZUS. This is why an entrepreneur working for a single client should analyse their situation independently rather than simply wait for the client's decision.
The transitional period and individual interpretations
The legislator has provided for a transitional period lasting until 8 July 2027. Entities that, before the amendment entered into force, concluded civil-law contracts with the features of an employment relationship may during this time voluntarily replace them with employment contracts and avoid liability for the misdemeanour of concluding the wrong type of contract. This is a good moment to talk to the client about the future model of cooperation. The second new tool is an individual interpretation issued by the Chief Labour Inspector on the classification of a legal relationship. The fee is PLN 40, the interpretation should be issued within 30 days and it is binding on PIP bodies. For an entrepreneur who wants to keep the B2B model but has doubts about its safety, this may be a way to gain certainty before any inspection.
Practical steps for a sole proprietorship
It is worth starting with a review of the contract and — more importantly — of how it is actually performed. The contract should define a result or a scope of services rather than working time, and provide for the contractor's liability for the quality of the service. It helps if the entrepreneur genuinely decides on how and where tasks are carried out, can use their own tools and subcontractors, and if remuneration is linked to results or the scope of work. Having other clients, one's own website or an offer addressed to the market is also helpful. If the analysis shows that the cooperation does not in fact differ from a regular job, it is worth comparing what switching to an employment contract would cost both parties and making an informed decision before an inspector makes it for them.