What the Law Actually Says
Article 271a of Poland’s Criminal Code penalizes issuing or using invoices that misrepresent facts material to determining public-law obligations. But the devil resides in the details—specifically, in the amounts.
The provision applies only to invoices where the “total amount due” exceeds 200,000 PLN. Below that threshold, Article 271a doesn’t apply. Above 5,000,000 PLN—we’re dealing with a felony carrying up to 20 years’ imprisonment. The same as for murder in its basic form.
Twenty Years for a Piece of Paper
Since March 1, 2017, issuing an invoice that misrepresents reality can constitute a felony. Not a misdemeanor—a felony, with exposure to 20 years’ imprisonment.
The legislature made no secret of its intentions: combating VAT mafias, carousel schemes, organized operations defrauding billions from the Treasury. The collateral effect: a provision that can also ensnare entrepreneurs unwittingly drawn into someone else’s fraud.
Thresholds That Determine Everything
200,000 PLN — the entry threshold. Below this amount, Article 271a doesn’t apply. An invoice for 199,999 PLN is, at most, a fiscal crime or general intellectual forgery under Article 271 of the Criminal Code (up to 5 years).
Above 200,000 PLN — basic type. Six months to 8 years.
Above 5,000,000 PLN — felony. Three to 20 years. No suspension, no conditional discontinuation.
What counts is the gross amount on the invoice—not the actual transaction value, not the VAT depletion amount. You can go to prison for an invoice documenting a transaction that never occurred, for goods that don’t exist.
Two Paths to Liability
Issuance — introducing the invoice into circulation. Merely drafting and stashing it in a drawer isn’t yet a crime. But emailing it, delivering it to a counterparty, booking it—that’s another matter.
Use — employing someone else’s false invoice. An accountant who knowingly enters an empty invoice in the VAT register bears the same liability as its issuer.
Aggregation: A Trap for the Unwary
Ten invoices at 50,000 PLN each don’t yet trigger Article 271a—unless prosecutors demonstrate action “with premeditated intent at short intervals.” Then values aggregate, and the perpetrator faces half-million charges.
Prosecutors regularly employ this construction. A series of small invoices that individually don’t breach the threshold can collectively constitute a felony.
Intent: Where Unawareness Ends
The crime requires intentionality. But note: conditional intent suffices—foreseeing the possibility and accepting it.
The classic example from case law: an employee issues invoices for large amounts, though the company has no warehouses, no transport, no personnel to handle such transactions. They never see the goods. They know “something’s off,” but keep issuing anyway. That’s enough.
Where’s the line? Negligence—even gross negligence—isn’t yet intent. An entrepreneur who failed to verify a counterparty and “got played” into a carousel hasn’t committed a crime under Article 271a if they genuinely didn’t know and didn’t accept participation in fraud.
The problem is that the line between “should have known” and “accepted” can be thin. And it’s the prosecutor who decides which side to place the defendant.
Concurrent Offenses: Double Liability
The Supreme Court, in its January 24, 2013 resolution (I KZP 19/12), settled the matter: rules excluding multiple assessments don’t operate between the Criminal Code and the Fiscal Penal Code. One act—two convictions.
In practice, this means that for issuing an empty invoice, one can simultaneously face liability under:
- Article 271a of the Criminal Code (intellectual invoice forgery),
- Article 62 § 2 of the Fiscal Penal Code (issuing an unreliable invoice),
- and if the invoice served to obtain a VAT refund—also Article 286 of the Criminal Code (fraud).
The aggregate sentence can be severe.
Lesser Cases: Light at the End of the Tunnel
Article 271a § 3 provides a privileged type—up to 3 years’ imprisonment. Crucially: it applies even to the felony under § 2. One can therefore issue an invoice for 10 million and receive a suspended sentence if the court finds a lesser case.
When? When despite the high invoice amount, actual harmfulness was minimal—for instance, a fictitious transaction was detected before anyone managed to use the invoice for tax purposes.
What to Do When the Summons Arrives
Don’t give statements without a lawyer. Invoice cases are complex, and prosecutors possess material from tax audits that the defense initially lacks.
Gather evidence of good faith. Correspondence with counterparties, verification documents, cooperation history. Everything demonstrating that the transaction appeared genuine.
Consider the defense strategy from the first interview. In invoice cases, what the suspect says (or doesn’t say) at the first interrogation often proves decisive.
