The development of electromobility has not only forced a transformation in the transport and energy sectors but has also raised questions regarding the tax treatment of new infrastructure, particularly electric vehicle charging stations. Although this issue may seem minor from a technical perspective, its tax implications – especially in the context of real estate tax – have proved significant and have remained ambiguous for a long time. Until the end of 2024, the positions of taxpayers, tax authorities and administrative courts were often divergent. It was only a statutory amendment that finally brought the long-awaited clarity – though not without further interpretive questions remain.
From Legislative Silence to Normative Redefinition
Until the end of 2024, the Local Taxes and Charges Act (u.p.o.l.) (Journal of Laws of 2025, item 707, consolidated text) did not directly address electric vehicle charging stations directly. The subject of taxation was land, buildings parts or thereof, and structures or parts thereof associated with business activity (Art. 2(1) u.p.o.l.). The key interpretative issue was therefore whether a charging station could be classified as a “structure” under the meaning of Art. 1a(1)(2) u.p.o.l., which in turn referred to the definition of “structure” in Art. 3(3) of the Building Law Act of July 7, 1994 (Journal of Laws of 2025, item 418, consolidated text).
The crux of the interpretative problem was to deciding whether a charging pole, terminal, or set of devices (often integrated with an electrical cabinet or placed on a foundation) should be considered as a taxable structure in its entirety, or only with regard to its construction elements — such as the foundation, concrete slab, or parking surface. This uncertainty was exacerbated by the fact that many charging stations are mobile or semi-mobile, lacking a permanent attachment to the land — a factor deemed essential by tax authorities — which made it difficult to classify them unequivocally as 'structures’ for tax purposes.
Divergent Positions: Taxpayers vs. Authorities
In applications for individual tax rulings, taxpayers (e.g. Interpretations issued by the Mayor of Łomża, 7 February 2024, No. WSB 3120.16.1.2024; Warsaw City Office, 24 April 2024, ref. COP-13/31101/956/GWA/24; Szczecin City Office, 4 March 2024, ref. WPiOL-VI.310.1.2023.JKO) often argued that charging stations:
- are technical devices, not construction objects,
- do not meet the criterion of being “erected” — they are bolted, mounted, sometimes relocatable,
- are not constructed with “building products” as defined in Art. 2(1) of the Building Law,
- are not permanently attached to the ground (no foundation, possibility of dismantling).
It was often noted that without a permanent connection to the ground, the criteria for classification as a “structure” for property tax purposes were not met.
By contrast, the tax authorities sometimes adopted a far more formalistic approach. For example, in an individual ruling dated April 9, 2024 (ref. PL.310.1.2024), the Mayor of Olsztyn, relying on u.p.o.l. provisions, the Building Law, and a 2011 Constitutional Tribunal ruling, stated that a charging station could be considered as a structure (specifically a “building device”) if simultaneously met the following criteria:
- was erected using “building products” (Art. 3(1) of the Building Law),
- is a technical device linked to a structure in the tax sense (e.g. a power line),
- is neither a building nor a small architectural object.
In this context, the authority found that the term “construction products” – despite the lack of a precise statutory definition in either in the Local Taxes and Charges Act (u.p.o.l.) or in the Construction Law – the term 'construction products’ should be understood in accordance with everyday language, following the approach presented by the Supreme Administrative Court (hereinafter: “NSA”) in its judgment of 30 May 2023 (III FSK 48/22). Consequently, construction products should include, inter alia, steel and metal components (e.g. pipes, sheets and profiles) that are used permanently for the installation and operation of a device. A charging station that is either placed on foundations or integrated with an electrical cabinet meets this condition.
Given the absence of a statutory definition of a “technical device,” the authority assumed that a “charging device” as defined in a dictionary – serving an auxiliary function in relation to the power grid – qualifies as a construction device within the meaning of Article 3(9) of the Construction Law, even if it is not physically and permanently connected to another construction structure.
Ultimately, the Mayor of Olsztyn ruled out the possibility of classifying a charging station as either a small architectural structure or a building, finding that it did not meet the required criteria for such qualifications.
The applicant disagreed with the position of the tax authority and appealed to the Voivodeship Administrative Court (hereinafter: “WSA”) in Olsztyn, seeking the annulment of the decision in its entirety. However, the tax authority upheld its stance. Nevertheless, on 17 July 2024, the WSA in Olsztyn annulled the individual interpretation by ruling that the authority must re-examine the case, taking into account the interpretation of u.p.o.l. and the Construction Law as set out in the reasoning of the judgment.In response to that ruling, on 17 October 2024 the Mayor of Olsztyn issued a new individual interpretation (ref. PL.310.1.2024), changing his previous position. He stated that the charging station, as a technical device, could not be permitted to enable the use of the foundation or parking slab in accordance with their intended purpose. Conversely, it is these structural elements that enable the charging station to function properly.According to the authority, the well-established line of case law of the NSA states that, under the legal framework applicable after 27 June 2015, power equipment such as switchgear, transformers and automation systems are not classified as construction devices under Article 3(9) of the Construction Law and Article 1a(1)(2) of u.p.o.l. if they are not technically and functionally linked to a construction structure.Consequently, the authority held that the vehicle charging infrastructure described in the application is not subject to real estate tax, as it does not fall under the definition of a structure in Article 3(3) of the Construction Law and its annex, nor is it a construction device functionally connected with a structure under Article 3(9) of the Construction Law.In contrast, in some individual rulings issued in the first half of 2024, tax authorities adopted a more taxpayer-friendly approach. For example, in an interpretation of 22 February 2024, the authority (Białystok City Hall) confirmed that only the structural elements accompanying a charging station – such as foundations or concrete slabs on which the devices are placed – are subject to real estate tax.
A similar position was presented in the interpretation of the Mayor of Warsaw of 24 April 2024, in which a clear distinction was made depending on how the station was constructed. If the station is attached to an existing parking slab or garage ceiling withno separate foundation, it will not be considered as a structure, so no tax obligation will arise. However, if the station is placed on a separate foundation, only that structural part – i.e. the foundation itself – will be subject to taxation.
Importantly, the Warsaw tax authority also emphasized that the possibility of easily dismantling and relocating the device without damaging the foundation indicates the technical separateness of the two elements, even though together they form a functional unit.
Administrative Courts’ Position
Despite the absence of uniform statutory regulations prior to 2024 amendment of u.p.o.l., administrative courts gradually had begun to develop a consistent standpoint of real estate tax provisions in relation to charging stations for electric vehicles. In this respect, rulings of the WSA in Szczecin and Gliwice were particularly significant, as they expressly rejected the possibility of treating such devices as structures or construction devices within the meaning of tax law.
For instance, in its judgment of 29 January 2025 (ref. I SA/Sz 472/24), the WSA in Szczecin explicitly stated that a charging station cannot be considered a construction device as defined inArticle 3(9) of the Construction Law, and therefore – cannot be treated as a structure subject to taxation under Article 1a(1)(2) of u.p.o.l.. The Court emphasised that such infrastructure is not expressly listed in Article 3(9) of the Construction Law and does not meet the criteria of functional subordination to other construction structures, such as a foundations or garage slabs. Furthermore, the Court deemed, it unjustified to extend the notion of construction devices to include charging stations solely due to of their technical connection to the power grid.
The WSA in Szczecin relied on the established case law of the NSA, including the judgment of 6 December 2022 (ref. III FSK 740/22) and the judgment of the WSA in Poznań of 14 February 2023 (ref. I SA/Po 636/22), emphasizing that following the amendment of the Construction Law effective from 28 June 2015, electrical devices (such as switchgears, transformers, or control equipment) cannot be directly equated with construction devices unless they have an explicit functional link with another constructional structure.
Previously, the WSA in Gliwice had adopted a similar view in its judgment of 19 December 2024 (ref. I SA/Gl 628/24), additionally referring to the broad interpretation of the concept of a “technical device” and its relation to a structure or building. Citing the NSA’s judgment of 13 March 2024 (ref. III FSK 3953/21), the WSA outlined the criteria a technical device must meet to qualify as a construction device. Apart from lacking the features of a building or structure, such a device must:
- be functionally and directly linked to a specific structure or building,
- enable its use in accordance with its intended purpose,
- be erected using construction products.
In the view of the WSA, charging stations do not meet these conditions – they do not fulfil a function that enables the use of other buildings or structures; rather, theyare autonomous infrastructure units that can be freely relocated, modified, and replaced.
Notably, in both judgments – of the WSA in Szczecin and the WSA in Gliwice – the courts stressed the need for definitional precision and opposed that tax authorities’ expansive interpretation, which attempted to tax charging stations merely on the basis of their technical role in the power system. The courts noted that such an approach would contravene the principle of legality in taxation and result in extending tax liability without a clear statutory basis.Consequently, both courts found that charging stations – as technical devices – cannot be classified as structures within the meaning of u.p.o.l., unless they have separate, permanent structural elements (e.g. foundations) which, in themselves, may be subject to taxation as structures.
Amendment to u.p.o.l. – an attempt at systemic clarification
One of the objectives of the amendment to the Local Taxes and Charges Act, introduced by the Act of 19 November 2024 (Journal of Laws 2024, item 1757, hereinafter: the “Amendment to u.p.o.l.”), address long-standing interpretative doubts concerning the taxation of modern technical infrastructure – including electric vehicle charging stations. The legislator sought to partially clarify this issue and adapt the provisions to contemporary technological and engineering realities.
Despite these intentions, the amended provisions of u.p.o.l. do not directly address charging stations. No statutory definition of such installations has been introduced, nor have they been specified as a separate category of structures, nor has their potential real estate tax liability been explicitly defined. The matter must still be assessed under the general interpretative rules, in particular the definition of a “structure” in Article 1a(1)(2) of u.p.o.l..
Under the amended provisions, particular significance is attached to Article 1a(1)(2)(d) of the u.p.o.l, which extends the definition of a structure to include “technical devices other than those listed in points (a)–(c), solely in respect of their construction parts, erected as a result of construction works.” Although general in nature, this provision is of key importance for the tax assessment of charging stations, as it establishes a clear boundary: only those elements of a technical device that result from construction works within the meaning of the Act may be subject to taxation.
In this context, it is important to clarify that “construction works” – pursuant to Article 1a(1)(2b) of u.p.o.l. – are defined as activities consisting of construction, reconstruction, superstructure, extension, alteration, or installation, insofar as they fall under the scope of the Construction Law. For tax purposes, it is therefore essential to determine whether individual components of a charging station were created as a result of such works and whether they meet the criteria of a structure, i.e. a permanent connection to the ground, execution using construction products, and a defined technical function.
In practice, this may lead to varied classifications depending on the specific characteristics of a given charging station. For example, in the case of free-standing stations placed on concrete foundations, only the foundations may be subject to taxation as the construction part. The charging pillar itself – as a technical device not erected as a result of construction works or not meeting the definitional criteria of a structure – will not be taxed. This interpretation has already been reflected in administrative practice, as evidenced by individual tax rulings issued by the Mayor of Warsaw on 24 April 2024 and by the City of Białystok on 22 February 2024.
Despite the legislative intervention, not all contentious issues have been resolved. The 2024 amendment to u.p.o.l. does not provide a definitive answer regarding the tax status of electric vehicle charging stations. Rather, it confirms the previously established interpretative approach, according to which only those elements of technical infrastructure that have a constructional character are subject to taxation.
Thus, despite the partial clarification of statutory terminology, the amendment does not conclusively resolve the dispute over the classification and taxation of charging stations. A detailed technical and legal analysis of each individual case remains necessary, along with an assessment of whether a given installation meets the conditions arising from the definitions contained in u.p.o.l. and the Construction Law. In practice, the key role will be played by new individual tax interpretations issued under the amended provisions, as well as by the jurisprudence of administrative courts.
