Lawyers of our Law Firm, Beata Bieniek-Wiera, Attorney, and Dominika Bielecka, Attorney Trainee, won with the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) again
A client from the furniture industry, who cooperated on a B2B basis with over 80 companies, asked us for help. As a result of the ZUS inspection, decisions questioning all agreements were made! The pension authority pointed out that those people did not carry out business activity, but are the client’s service providers. And great insurance contributions were charged.
Our lawyers proved some gaps in ZUS’s reasoning and, based on the evidence, proved that ZUS had been wrong. The court judged that the parties were independent entities acting on a continuous basis on their own behalf and at their own risk through commercial cooperation.
Having won the case, the client commented:
“Really?! This is excellent news! After so many crossroads … Thank you so much. Congratulations. I can’t believe that … Excellent!”
related posts
Can the contribution of shares in the form of a contribution in kind be treated as a disposal of shares benefiting from the CIT exemption for income of alternative investment companies (in Poland called: “ASI”)?
Can the contribution of shares in the form of a contribution in kind be treated as a disposal of shares benefiting from the CIT exemption for income of alternative investment companies (in Poland called: “ASI”)?Income of a Polish family foundation from its participation in a Luxembourg-based Societe en commandite speciale (“SCSp”) vs. CIT exemption.
Income of a Polish family foundation from its participation in a Luxembourg-based Societe en commandite speciale (“SCSp”) vs. CIT exemption.