In its judgment of 1 October 2025, case no. I FSK 1539/22, the Supreme Administrative Court (NSA) confirmed that an entity offering SaaS solutions for online stores may be considered an operator of an electronic interface facilitating sales, and therefore a taxpayer obliged to settle VAT on transactions carried out via the provided system.
An operator of an electronic interface is not limited to large marketplaces
The Supreme Administrative Court pointed out that the status of a taxpayer facilitating sales through an electronic interface does not apply exclusively to large online platforms (such as Amazon or Temu). It is sufficient for an entity to participate in the transaction in a real way, even if its role is indirect or supplementary.
According to Article 7a(1) of the Polish VAT Act and Article 5b of Regulation 282/2011, any entity that facilitates, via an electronic interface, the sale of goods—including distance sales of imported products with a value not exceeding EUR 150—may be recognized as a taxpayer. Consequently, the definition of a facilitating taxpayer is broad and also covers providers of technologies supporting the sales process, even if they do not operate a classic online store or marketplace and act merely as intermediaries in the transaction.
The SaaS model as a form of facilitating sales
The case considered by the NSA concerned a company providing online store software in a SaaS model. The software allowed end customers to place orders, choose payment methods, submit the data required to complete the transaction, and use the complaints system. At the same time, the user of the software had access to tools for processing orders and communicating with customers. In practice, this meant that the sale of goods took place through the electronic interface created and managed by the company.
The company emphasized that it did not participate in the sales process and merely provided an IT tool and server space, while the store regulations and the conclusion of the sales contract remained the responsibility of the seller. However, the tax authority and administrative courts did not accept this argument.
KIS, WSA and NSA’s position on facilitating sales
Both the Director of the National Revenue Information (KIS) and the administrative courts of both instances held that the company’s activities went beyond merely providing an IT tool. These activities included offering a shopping cart, supporting the payment process, handling orders, possessing customer and transaction data, and accepting complaints regarding deliveries. According to the courts, such activities demonstrate a direct influence on the sales process, meeting the criteria for recognizing the company as an operator of an electronic interface under the VAT Act.
The Supreme Administrative Court noted that even indirect involvement in shaping delivery terms and the payment process may determine VAT taxpayer status. As a result, VAT settlement and reporting obligations may be transferred to the company for supplies made by merchants (system users – sellers) through its system.
What does this mean for the e-commerce sector?
The NSA emphasized that the assessment of “facilitating” sales should be based on the actual scope of services rather than declarations or the adopted business model. The mere fact that contractual responsibility (terms & conditions, returns, pricing) is assigned to the seller does not eliminate VAT obligations on the part of the SaaS provider.
The cited judgment confirms that entities offering online stores in a SaaS model may be recognized as operators of electronic interfaces facilitating sales, and thus VAT taxpayers. The scope of VAT obligations depends on the actual—not declared—nature of participation in the transaction, and tax obligations may also be imposed on smaller technology entities. This NSA ruling may set a new interpretative direction, especially for technology companies providing services to the e-commerce sector.
