This article answers the following questions:

• From when is the use of the e-Delivery system mandatory?
• Who is required to use the e-Delivery system?
• Can a legal complaint be submitted to a court via the e-Delivery system? 

The e-Delivery system was intended to simplify communication between citizens and public authorities. However, it has instead become a source of chaos and confusion. While the tax office encourages taxpayers to use this channel, it simultaneously demands that complaints against decisions or tax interpretations submitted via e-Delivery be rejected. This practice was firmly opposed by the Voivodship Administrative Court in Warsaw, which described it as a “procedural trap.” 

e-Delivery: legislative confusion

From 1 January 2025, the obligation to use the e-Delivery system applies to public entities and individuals performing professions of public trust. From 1 April 2025, this obligation was extended to all entrepreneurs registered in the National Court Register, as well as entities conducting business activity (e.g. associations and foundations). From 1 July 2025, entities listed in the Central Register and Information on Economic Activity are also required to use the e-Delivery system. 

The issue arises from the fact that, under the Electronic Delivery Act, courts and tribunals will not be required to use the e-Delivery system until 1 October 2029. According to the current regulations, a complaint must be submitted via the same authority whose action, inaction, or excessive delay is the subject of the complaint. If submitted electronically, the complaint must be lodged using a publicly accessible ICT system, which, under the legislation, is exclusively ePUAP. 

At the same time, pursuant to Article 147(2) of the Electronic Delivery Act, until the end of 2025, correspondence sent by a natural person via the ePUAP service is legally equivalent to correspondence sent using the public registered electronic delivery service. Some taxpayers therefore interpret this provision as reciprocal, treating complaints submitted via e-Delivery as equivalent to those submitted via ePUAP.

Voivodship Administrative Court sharply criticises the “tax trap”

Unfortunately, under such circumstances, the tax authority demands that complaints submitted by taxpayers via the e-Delivery system be rejected outright on formal grounds. 

This practice was criticised by the Voivodship Administrative Court in Warsaw in its judgment of 11 June 2025, case no. III SA/Wa 778/25. 

The case concerned an entrepreneur who had submitted a request for an individual interpretation to the Head of the National Revenue Administration Information Centre. All correspondence with the tax authority was conducted – in accordance with applicable regulations – via the e-Delivery service. Upon receiving a negative interpretation, the entrepreneur decided to challenge it. 

As the applicable regulations require that a complaint to the court be submitted via the same authority with which the taxpayer had previously exchanged correspondence using e-Delivery, it seemed natural to the entrepreneur that the complaint could also be filed using this communication channel. Unfortunately, he encountered an administrative wall: the Head of the National Revenue Administration Information Centre stated that the entrepreneur had no right to submit the complaint via e-Delivery and demanded its rejection on formal grounds. Had the court agreed with this position, the complaint would not have been considered on its merits at all.

Fortunately for the taxpayer, the Voivodship Administrative Court in Warsaw held that the current regulations are sufficiently ambiguous that taxpayers do not receive a clear message as to which delivery system should be used and until when. In the Court’s view, rejecting a complaint solely because the taxpayer used a system other than ePUAP would amount to depriving the taxpayer of the right to a fair trial. The Court also noted that the legislator had promoted the e-Delivery system and encouraged taxpayers to use this communication channel. A situation in which the use of e-Delivery would disqualify the effectiveness of a complaint submitted to the court would, in the Court’s opinion, be incompatible with the principles of the rule of law.

Inconsistent line of judicial decisions

The judgment of the Voivodship Administrative Court in Warsaw is not the only ruling concerning e-Delivery that is favourable to taxpayers. 

Similar views were expressed by the Voivodship Administrative Court in Gdańsk in its judgments of 17 July 2025, case nos. III SA/Gd 189/25 and III SA/Gd 190/25, as well as in the judgment of 16 July 2025, case no. I SA/Gd 302/25. The Voivodship Administrative Court in Lublin also adopted a similar position in its judgment of 4 June 2025, case no. I SA/Lu 88/25.

This marks a shift in the line of judicial decisions, which had previously been unfavourable to taxpayers. It can now be stated with certainty that a taxpayer who conducted all communication with the authority via e-Delivery should not be penalised for using the same channel to submit a complaint. Therefore, it is worth asserting one’s rights.