The IT sector remains one of the natural beneficiaries of R&D tax relief. The development of proprietary software, digital platforms, new functionalities, algorithms or automation mechanisms very often falls within the definition of research and development activities.
A positive example is the individual tax ruling issued by the Director of National Revenue Information on 29 May 2026, ref. 0114-KDIP2-1.4010.96.2026.2.KW. The ruling concerned work on a proprietary telecommunications and digital platform, including, among other things, a backend designed from scratch, microservices, real-time billing mechanisms, proprietary integration layers and non-standard security solutions. The tax authority confirmed that this type of work may constitute R&D activity, provided that it leads to the creation of new or significantly improved solutions.
This is a good starting point for software houses and technology companies. IT projects may still benefit from R&D tax relief, particularly where the taxpayer develops proprietary components, builds original architecture, designs new functionalities or solves specific technical problems. In practice, however, the key issue is to separate that part of the project from routine or purely implementation-related activities.
Recent tax rulings also show that the nature of the project itself should be analysed separately from the costs to be deducted under the relief. In the individual tax ruling of 14 May 2026, ref. 0111-KDIB1-3.4010.100.2026.3.ZK, the Director of National Revenue Information accepted that an IT project constituted R&D activity, but refused to allow SaaS system costs to be covered by the relief. The decisive factor was that subscription fees for access to the system did not fall within the closed catalogue of eligible costs specified in Article 18d of the CIT Act. In particular, they did not constitute depreciation write-offs on intangible assets, nor costs of acquiring specialist equipment, or materials.
In practice, this means that a project may have a research and development character, but not every cost incurred in its realization will automatically qualify as an eligible cost for R&D tax relief purposes.
A similar approach can be observed in the individual tax ruling of 23 April 2026, ref. 0111-KDIB1-3.4010.54.2026.1.JG, concerning licences and subscriptions for specialist software. The tax authority pointed out that the mere use of a given tool in R&D work does not, in itself, determine whether its cost may be deducted under the relief. The cost must fall within the statutory catalogue of eligible costs, for example as an amortised intangible asset.
This is particularly important for IT companies which, in their day-to-day operations, use numerous development tools, SaaS systems, testing environments and specialist subscriptions. Such tools may be essential for the realization of a project, but their tax treatment requires a separate analysis. This does not undermine the availability of R&D tax relief, but it shows that the cost calculation should be prepared selectively and technically correctly.
This approach is consistent with the structure of R&D tax relief. It is necessary to assess separately whether a project qualifies as research and development activity and whether a given expense falls within the catalogue of eligible costs. At the same time, in IT projects, it is becoming increasingly important not merely to state in general terms that the work involved software development, but to effectively show which specific elements of the project were creative and developmental in nature.
The most challenging cases are mixed projects, which involve both the creation of new solutions and the implementation, adaptation of a ready-made system, integration with other tools or automation of business processes. In such cases, it is necessary to clearly separate creative development work from routine configuration, parameterisation, data migration or maintenance activities.
In this context, an important reference point is the judgment of the Provincial Administrative Court in Łódź of 4 February 2026, case no. I SA/Łd 615/25, concerning the implementation of systems supporting the applicant’s internal processes, including HR, analytics and employee self-service. The company argued that the project included, among other things, system integration, data migration, dedicated reports, process automation and the adaptation of functionalities to the needs of the capital group. The court, however, concluded that the documentation presented indicated primarily the implementation and adaptation of a ready-made system to the taxpayer’s needs.
An important element of this judgment was also the court’s assessment of how the work was carried out. The court noted that the use of known integration methods does not, in itself, prove that R&D activity is being conducted. This does not mean, however, that the use of common technologies, tools or programming languages excludes the application of the relief. They are merely working tools. For R&D qualification purposes, the key issue is whether, by using them, the taxpayer developed a creative solution going beyond standard implementation and whether this can be demonstrated with objective evidence in the documentation.
This judgment does not mean that implementations of ERP, HR or CRM systems cannot contain R&D elements. Rather, it shows that in such projects it is particularly important to identify the part of the work that genuinely involves the creation of a new solution, such as proprietary code, an original module, a non-standard integration or a solution to a technical problem not addressed by the standard functionality provided by the system vendor.
The point is therefore not to exclude implementation projects from R&D tax relief, but to separate them appropriately. Standard activities, such as configuration, parameterisation, data migration or system maintenance, should be distinguished from programming and development work that genuinely leads to the creation of new or significantly improved solutions.
From the perspective of IT companies, R&D tax relief should be planned already at the project execution stage, rather than only at the annual tax settlement stage. In practice, this means that potentially qualifying R&D work should be identified on an ongoing basis and supported by documentation showing the creative nature of the work and the innovations developed as part of the project. Materials that project teams often prepare for operational purposes may be helpful in this respect, including technical documentation, descriptions of technological problems, test reports and ongoing time records allocated to specific R&D work.
It is therefore advisable to consider at R&D tax relief not only as a tax preference, but also as a tool for structuring the project process. The better a company is able to demonstrate what was created, what problem was solved, who worked on it and which costs were connected with that work, the greater the chance of using the relief safely and effectively.
In conclusion, recent practice confirms that IT projects still have significant potential for R&D tax relief. However, the greatest value comes from a selective approach: separating creative development work from standard IT activities and properly allocating the related costs. For software houses and IT departments, this is the right moment to review ongoing projects not only from a business and technical perspective, but also from a tax perspective.
Michał Solarski
Manager
