{"id":4352,"date":"2026-10-27T13:20:13","date_gmt":"2026-10-27T13:20:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/?p=4352"},"modified":"2026-10-27T13:20:27","modified_gmt":"2026-10-27T13:20:27","slug":"global-mobility-technology-company-international-work","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/publikacje\/global-mobility-technology-company-international-work\/","title":{"rendered":"Global Mobility in a Technology Company. How to Turn Chaos into a Repeatable Model for International Work."},"content":{"rendered":"

Your CTO works from Lisbon, your senior developer is a B2B contractor based in Berlin, and your new product manager wants to spend 3 months in Barcelona. You told each of them \u201cOK" under different terms. You do not know who is responsible for the formalities, what tax obligations have arisen, or whether ZUS will challenge the social security model. The question is not whether you have a problem. The question is when you will find out about it.<\/p>\n

Global mobility<\/strong> \u2013 managing cross-border work within a company \u2013 is an area that is growing faster in technology companies than the policies that should govern it. More than 90% of IT professionals work remotely or in a hybrid model, while the talent shortage in the sector stands at approximately 147,000 professionals. This means that international recruitment and remote work from another country are not exceptions \u2013 they are part of everyday business. And every staffing decision of this kind made without a consistent model creates operational legal debt.<\/p>\n

In this article, I will show you how to turn chaos into a repeatable international work framework<\/strong>: which regulations you need to know, what risks arise from not having a model, and what exactly you should implement so that your company can grow internationally without legal roadblocks.<\/p>\n

Key terms you need to know<\/h2>\n

Before we move on to the specifics, it is worth clarifying the terminology. Each of the following cross-border work models is governed by different regulations \u2013 and creates different obligations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Term<\/th>\nWhat it means<\/th>\nWhen it applies<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Posting of workers<\/strong><\/td>\nTemporarily sending an employee to work in another EU country as part of the employer\u2019s provision of services<\/td>\nA Polish company carries out a project for a client in Germany and sends a developer there for 6 months<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Remote work from abroad<\/strong><\/td>\nAn employee performs their duties from another country without the employer providing cross-border services<\/td>\nA developer works from Lisbon for a Polish employer<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Local employment<\/strong><\/td>\nA company employs someone directly in the country where that person works<\/td>\nA Polish company signs an employment contract with a candidate living in Spain who works from Barcelona<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
A1 certificate<\/strong><\/td>\nA document confirming which EU country\u2019s social security system covers an employee<\/td>\nPosting, work in several countries, remote work from abroad<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Permanent establishment (PE)<\/strong><\/td>\nA fixed place through which a company conducts business in another country \u2013 creating a tax obligation in that country<\/td>\nA remote employee makes business decisions from a home office abroad, which may be deemed a permanent establishment of the employer<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
EOR (Employer of Record)<\/strong><\/td>\nAn external entity that formally employs an employee in a given country on your company\u2019s behalf<\/td>\nA company wants to hire a professional in the Netherlands without setting up a company there<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Three cross-border work models and their legal implications<\/h2>\n

Each form of international cooperation is governed by a different set of regulations. Misclassifying the model \u2013 for example, treating remote work from abroad as a posting \u2013 creates the risk of overdue social security contributions, tax arrears, and administrative penalties.<\/p>\n

Posting of workers<\/h3>\n

It is governed by Directive 96\/71\/EC<\/strong>, as amended by Directive (EU) 2018\/957<\/strong> (implemented by 30 July 2020). The Polish Act of 10 June 2016 on the Posting of Workers in the Framework of the Provision of Services implements these rules at national level.<\/p>\n

The key rules:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The \u201csame work \u2013 same pay" principle applies \u2013 the employer must provide a posted worker with remuneration (not merely the minimum rate) at the level applicable in the host country for the relevant industry and region.<\/li>\n
  2. For up to 12 months<\/strong> (or 18 months after submitting a reasoned notification) \u2013 the catalogue of minimum employment conditions under Article 3 of the Directive applies: working time, leave, remuneration, occupational health and safety, and equal treatment.<\/li>\n
  3. After 12\/18 months<\/strong> \u2013 the employee is covered by almost all provisions of the host country\u2019s employment law, except for procedures governing the conclusion and termination of contracts and supplementary occupational retirement pension schemes.<\/li>\n
  4. A posted worker remains in the Polish social security system<\/strong> for a maximum of 24 months<\/strong> (Article 12 of Regulation 883\/2004), provided that an A1 certificate is obtained from ZUS.<\/li>\n
  5. The 12\/18-month period includes the working time of successive employees replacing one another in the same position \u2013 the limit cannot be circumvented by rotating personnel.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Administrative obligations<\/strong> when posting workers to Poland: submitting a declaration to the National Labour Inspectorate no later than on the day the service begins, designating a contact person for the National Labour Inspectorate, and retaining documentation (employment contract, working time records, documents confirming remuneration), which must be made available within 5 business days during the posting.<\/p>\n

    Remote work from abroad<\/h3>\n

    There is no separate EU directive governing remote work from abroad. Directive 96\/71\/EC does not apply because the employer is not providing cross-border services.<\/p>\n

    The definition of remote work in the Labour Code<\/a> (effective from 7 April 2023) is territorially neutral<\/strong> \u2013 it covers work \u201cat a location specified by the employee and agreed with the employer on each occasion". Formally, it does not exclude working from abroad, but it does not regulate the resulting cross-border implications.<\/p>\n

    This means that:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Employment law: the mandatory provisions of the country<\/strong> from which the work is actually performed apply (Rome I Regulation, Article 8).<\/li>\n
    2. Social security: Article 13 of Regulation 883\/2004 (work in two or more countries) applies \u2013 if at least 25% of working time<\/strong> is spent working in the employee\u2019s country of residence, the employee is covered by that country\u2019s system.<\/li>\n
    3. Since 1 July 2023, the Framework Agreement on cross-border telework<\/strong> has applied in Poland: if remote work from the country of residence accounts for 25\u201349.9%<\/strong> of total working time, the Polish social security system may continue to apply (US-36 application to ZUS + A1 certificate).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      An important distinction<\/strong>: occasional remote work<\/a> (Article 67\u00b3\u00b3 of the Labour Code) is limited to 24 days per calendar year<\/strong>. Companies that treat an employee\u2019s several-week stay abroad as \u201coccasional work" do not eliminate the tax and social security risks arising under the laws of the country where the work is actually performed.<\/p>\n

      Local employment<\/h3>\n

      The simplest model from a regulatory perspective: the employee is fully subject to the employment law and social security system of the country in which they work (Article 11 of Regulation 883\/2004). The Posted Workers Directive does not apply.<\/p>\n

      However, it requires setting up a company<\/a> or branch in the destination country, or using an EOR.<\/p>\n

      Tax and social security thresholds in selected jurisdictions<\/h2>\n

      If your employees work from Germany, Spain, or Portugal, you need to know the thresholds beyond which tax and social security obligations arise. The table below summarises the most important information.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
      Parameter<\/th>\nGermany<\/th>\nSpain<\/th>\nPortugal<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
      Tax residence threshold<\/strong><\/td>\nHabitual residence for > approximately 6 months per year or having a permanent home<\/td>\n> 183 days in a calendar year or centre of economic interests<\/td>\nProgressive scale of 14.5\u201348%; NHR programme (10 years of preferential treatment) for new residents<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      183-day rule (double tax treaty)<\/strong><\/td>\nStay < 183 days + remuneration from a Polish employer + no permanent establishment in Germany \u2192 taxation only in Poland<\/td>\nStay < 183 days \u2192 generally no tax obligation in Spain<\/td>\nNo detailed information in Polish-language sources<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Non-resident rate<\/strong><\/td>\nDepends on the progressive scale (for quasi-residence: 90% of income earned in Germany)<\/td>\nIRNR: 24% (EU\/EEA: 19% if the conditions are met)<\/td>\nNo data<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      PE threshold (construction site)<\/strong><\/td>\n12 months (DTT); 6 months (Lohnsteuer)<\/td>\nDepends on the nature of the business<\/td>\nNo data<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

      Social security \u2013 EU thresholds applicable in all countries:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
      Threshold<\/th>\nMeaning<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
      24 months<\/strong><\/td>\nMaximum posting period while remaining in the Polish social security system (Article 12 of Regulation 883\/2004)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      25% of working time<\/strong><\/td>\nIf this proportion is worked in the country of residence \u2192 the employee is covered by that country\u2019s system (Article 13)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      25\u201349.9% of working time<\/strong><\/td>\nScope of the Framework Agreement on cross-border telework \u2013 possibility of remaining in the Polish social security system<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      5% of working time<\/strong><\/td>\nMarginal work \u2013 disregarded when determining the applicable legislation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

      Contact us<\/a> if you want to verify which social security system should cover your remote employees.<\/p>\n

      Penalties and sanctions \u2013 the cost of not having a global mobility model<\/h2>\n

      The lack of a consistent international work model is not an abstract risk. It means specific fines, arrears, and personal liability for management board members.<\/p>\n

      Poland \u2013 employment of foreign nationals<\/h3>\n

      The Act of 20 March 2025 on the Conditions for Admitting Foreign Nationals to Work (effective from 1 June 2025<\/strong>) introduced significantly higher penalties:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
      Violation<\/th>\nPenalty<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
      Illegally entrusting work to a foreign national<\/td>\nPLN 3,000\u201350,000 (minimum PLN 3,000 per person)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Intentional violation, exploitation, or deception<\/td>\nMinimum PLN 6,000 per person<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Fine imposed by a National Labour Inspectorate inspector<\/td>\nUp to PLN 10,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Documentation violations<\/td>\nPLN 1,000\u20133,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Foreign national working illegally<\/td>\nMinimum PLN 1,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Entrusting work through an illegal agency<\/td>\nMinimum PLN 6,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

      Poland \u2013 employment law and posting<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
      Violation<\/th>\nPenalty<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
      Failure to provide written confirmation of an employment contract (Article 281 of the Labour Code)<\/td>\nPLN 1,000\u201330,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Violation of regulations on remuneration, leave, or certificates of employment (Article 282 of the Labour Code)<\/td>\nPLN 1,000\u201330,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Violation of occupational health and safety regulations (Article 283 of the Labour Code)<\/td>\nPLN 1,000\u201330,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Breach of obligations under the Act on the Posting of Workers<\/td>\nPLN 1,000\u201330,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Failure to register an employee for social security (ZUS)<\/td>\nUp to PLN 5,000 + overdue contributions with interest<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

      Poland \u2013 criminal law<\/h3>\n

      Enabling or facilitating illegal residence for financial gain \u2013 imprisonment for 3 months to 5 years<\/strong> (Article 264a of the Criminal Code).<\/p>\n

      There are also consequences not shown in the penalty schedule: overdue ZUS contributions for up to 5 previous years, tax arrears with interest, and employee claims for benefits arising under the employment law of the country in which they actually worked.<\/p>\n

      Comparison of cross-border employment models<\/h2>\n

      If you want to hire a professional from another country, you can choose from several models. Each has different cost, legal, and operational implications.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
      Criterion<\/th>\nPosting<\/th>\nLocal employment (own company)<\/th>\nB2B with a foreign contractor<\/th>\nEOR (Employer of Record)<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
      Implementation time<\/strong><\/td>\nDays\u2013weeks (A1 + formalities)<\/td>\nMonths (company registration)<\/td>\nDays<\/td>\nDays\u2013weeks<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Control over the employee<\/strong><\/td>\nFull (employment relationship)<\/td>\nFull (employment relationship)<\/td>\nLimited (risk of reclassification)<\/td>\nLimited (the EOR is the formal employer)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Social security system<\/strong><\/td>\nPoland (up to 24 months)<\/td>\nDestination country<\/td>\nThe contractor is responsible<\/td>\nDestination country (registration handled by EOR)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      PE risk<\/strong><\/td>\nLow (temporary arrangement)<\/td>\nNone (local company)<\/td>\nLow<\/td>\nLow (depends on the structure)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Reclassification risk<\/strong><\/td>\nNone<\/td>\nNone<\/td>\nHigh<\/td>\nLow<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Scalability<\/strong><\/td>\nLow (time limits)<\/td>\nHigh (but expensive)<\/td>\nMedium<\/td>\nHigh<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Fixed cost<\/strong><\/td>\nLow<\/td>\nHigh (company maintenance)<\/td>\nLow<\/td>\nEOR fee<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      When to use<\/strong><\/td>\nTemporary projects (up to 24 months)<\/td>\nPermanent presence in the country<\/td>\nIndependent professionals, short-term projects<\/td>\nNo company in the country, need to hire quickly<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

      A note on B2B<\/strong>: the B2B model with a foreign contractor is popular among IT companies, but it carries a risk of being reclassified as an employment relationship \u2013 both by Polish authorities (the National Labour Inspectorate, ZUS) and by authorities in the country from which the contractor works. If the contractor works exclusively for one client, at fixed hours, using the company\u2019s tools \u2013 the B2B model may be challenged.<\/p>\n

      How to build a global mobility framework in a technology company<\/h2>\n

      Bringing order to mobility does not require a 200-page analysis. It requires a decision matrix, a single process owner, and standard scenarios with checklists. Below is the recommended sequence of steps.<\/p>\n

      Step 1: audit current practices<\/h3>\n

      List all instances of cross-border work in your company in a single table:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
      Employee\/contractor<\/th>\nCountry of work<\/th>\nEngagement model<\/th>\nTime working from abroad<\/th>\nWho is responsible for formalities<\/th>\nA1\/registration status<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
      (complete)<\/td>\n(complete)<\/td>\n(complete)<\/td>\n(complete)<\/td>\n(complete)<\/td>\n(complete)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

      The goal: to see the full picture \u2013 how many cases you have, in how many countries, who is responsible for what, and where the gaps are.<\/p>\n

      Step 2: decision matrix for new cases<\/h3>\n

      Instead of making ad hoc decisions for each new case, create a matrix based on the following criteria:<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Duration<\/strong> \u2013 short-term (< 3 months), medium-term (3\u201312 months), long-term (> 12 months).<\/li>\n
      2. Nature of the relationship<\/strong> \u2013 employment relationship or independent cooperation.<\/li>\n
      3. Company presence in the destination country<\/strong> \u2013 whether you have a company, a branch, or nothing there.<\/li>\n
      4. Tax risk<\/strong> \u2013 whether you exceed the 183-day threshold and whether a PE is created.<\/li>\n
      5. Cost and scalability<\/strong> \u2013 whether the model can be replicated for future hires.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Based on these criteria, you assign a model: posting, local employment, EOR, or B2B.<\/p>\n

        Step 3: remote work from abroad policy<\/h3>\n

        Remote work regulations<\/a> compliant with the Labour Code (effective from 7 April 2023) are the natural place to include a working from abroad policy. Standard regulations do not cover this \u2013 you need to expand them.<\/p>\n

        The policy should include:<\/p>\n

          \n
        1. Maximum time working from a given country<\/strong> \u2013 e.g. 30 days per calendar year (below tax and social security thresholds in most EU jurisdictions).<\/li>\n
        2. Application and approval procedure<\/strong> \u2013 who submits the application, who approves it, and how long before departure it must be submitted.<\/li>\n
        3. Grounds for refusal<\/strong> \u2013 e.g. countries with high tax risk, no double tax treaty, or inability to verify social security obligations.<\/li>\n
        4. Employee information obligations<\/strong> \u2013 reporting the country and period of work, confirming the address, and undertaking to comply with the limit.<\/li>\n
        5. Consequences of exceeding the limit<\/strong> \u2013 what happens if an employee stays longer than agreed.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Remember Article 29\u00b9 \u00a7 2 of the Labour Code: when an employee leaves to work abroad for a period of more than 4 consecutive weeks<\/strong>, you must provide them with additional information \u2013 about the country of work, the currency in which their remuneration will be paid, benefits related to working abroad, and the terms of their return.<\/p>\n

          Step 4: process owner<\/h3>\n

          Appoint one person responsible for coordinating mobility \u2013 e.g. the Head of People Ops. Otherwise, the matter will be fragmented among HR, payroll, legal counsel, and the manager, with no one overseeing the whole process.<\/p>\n

          The process owner\u2019s responsibilities:<\/p>\n

            \n
          1. Internal coordination (HR, payroll, legal, manager, employee).<\/li>\n
          2. Coordination with local advisers in the destination jurisdictions.<\/li>\n
          3. Maintaining a register of active mobility cases.<\/li>\n
          4. Periodic review (every 6 months) for changes in employees\u2019 circumstances and regulations.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            Step 5: allocation of responsibilities within a corporate group<\/h3>\n

            If you operate within a corporate group structure, establish in writing (e.g. in the form of a RACI matrix) who is responsible for each obligation:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
            Obligation<\/th>\nHead office<\/th>\nLocal company<\/th>\nExternal adviser<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
            Immigration formalities<\/td>\nCoordination<\/td>\nImplementation<\/td>\nExpert support<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
            Tax registrations<\/td>\nDecision<\/td>\nImplementation<\/td>\nAnalysis and advice<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
            Employment contract \/ amendment<\/td>\nTemplate<\/td>\nSigning<\/td>\nReview<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
            Payroll and contributions<\/td>\nSupervision<\/td>\nImplementation<\/td>\nAudit<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
            A1 certificate<\/td>\nApplication<\/td>\n\u2014<\/td>\nSupport<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

            Without such an allocation, you risk the head office assuming that the local company will handle the formalities, while the local company assumes the opposite. The result: no one has applied for an A1 certificate and no one has registered the employee with the local social security system.<\/p>\n

            Step 6: checklists for standard scenarios<\/h3>\n

            Prepare checklists for the three most common scenarios:<\/p>\n

              \n
            1. Remote work from abroad (up to 3 months)<\/strong> \u2013 employee application, verification of tax and social security thresholds, decision, time monitoring.<\/li>\n
            2. Employee relocation within a corporate group<\/strong> \u2013 model analysis (posting vs. local employment), allocation of roles between the head office\/local company, immigration formalities, A1 certificate or change of social security system, amendment to the contract.<\/li>\n
            3. Hiring a candidate from abroad<\/strong> \u2013 selection of the model (EOR vs. B2B vs. local company), cost analysis, onboarding, registrations.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              Step 7: internal communication<\/h3>\n

              Prepare an FAQ for employees and managers:<\/p>\n

                \n
              1. Can I work from abroad? Under what conditions?<\/li>\n
              2. Who should I submit my application to?<\/li>\n
              3. How many days can I work from a given country?<\/li>\n
              4. What happens if I exceed the limit?<\/li>\n
              5. Does the company cover additional costs (insurance, tax advice)?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                A lack of clear communication leads to employees acting on their own and the company only finding out about the problem after the fact.<\/p>\n

                We can help you with this<\/h2>\n

                Global mobility in a technology company<\/strong> combines employment law, tax law, social security, immigration regulations, and corporate governance. None of these areas operates in isolation \u2013 a decision about the engagement model for a foreign professional affects all the others.<\/p>\n

                We help technology companies bring order to their international work models. Our support includes:<\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. Audit of existing mobility practices<\/strong> \u2013 mapping all cross-border work cases and identifying gaps and risks.<\/li>\n
                2. Designing a decision matrix<\/strong> \u2013 selecting an engagement model (posting, local employment, EOR, B2B) for the company\u2019s specific scenarios.<\/li>\n
                3. Preparing a remote work from abroad policy<\/strong> \u2013 expanding remote work regulations to include cross-border work rules, application procedures, and limits.<\/li>\n
                4. Allocation of responsibilities within a corporate group<\/strong> \u2013 a RACI matrix for the head office, local companies, and external advisers.<\/li>\n
                5. Relocation and onboarding checklists<\/strong> \u2013 ready-to-implement procedures for standard scenarios.<\/li>\n
                6. Coordination with local advisers<\/strong> \u2013 cooperation with law firms and tax advisers in the destination jurisdictions.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  We combine employment law with the business context \u2013 the company\u2019s ownership structure, growth plans, and operating model. This ensures that staffing decisions are aligned with the direction in which the organisation is heading.<\/p>\n

                  Bring order to your international work model before it starts slowing your company down<\/h2>\n

                  A company that grows faster than its work policies accumulates debt that surfaces during an inspection, a dispute, or an investor\u2019s entry. Every additional cross-border work case without a consistent model increases exposure to overdue contributions, tax arrears, and administrative penalties.<\/p>\n

                  You do not need an extensive analysis to get started. You need: one audit of current practices, a decision matrix for new cases, a working from abroad policy, and a process owner. Everything else \u2013 checklists, allocation of roles, communication \u2013 is built on this foundation.<\/p>\n

                  If you have a team spread across several countries and want to bring order to your engagement rules before consequences arise \u2013 contact us<\/a>. We will identify the main risk areas and show you where to start.<\/p>\n

                  Frequently asked questions<\/h2>\n

                  If a developer works from Portugal for 2 months, does this automatically create a tax or social security obligation for my company in that country?<\/strong><\/p>\n

                  Not necessarily automatically, but the risk is real. For social security: if work from Portugal accounts for less than 25% of total working time, the employee generally remains in the Polish ZUS system. If it accounts for more, they may be covered by the Portuguese system. For tax purposes: Portugal applies a progressive scale of 14.5\u201348% to residents. Exceeding the residence thresholds or moving the centre of vital interests may result in the person being considered a tax resident. In addition, there is a risk that your company may create a permanent establishment (PE) in Portugal. Each case requires an individual analysis.<\/p>\n

                  Who in my company should own the mobility process?<\/strong><\/p>\n

                  One person \u2013 most commonly the Head of People Ops, HR Director, or COO. Their role is to coordinate between HR, payroll, legal counsel, the manager, and the employee, and to work with local advisers in the destination jurisdictions. Without a designated owner, the matter becomes fragmented and no one maintains the full picture: the model, documents, responsibilities, schedule, and communication. An external law firm can provide expert support, but operational decisions must remain with the company.<\/p>\n

                  What is the legal difference between posting and remote work from abroad?<\/strong><\/p>\n

                  Posting (Directive 96\/71\/EC) occurs when an employer temporarily sends an employee to another EU country as part of providing services \u2013 for example, to carry out a project for a foreign client. The employee remains in the Polish ZUS system for up to 24 months (A1 certificate) and is subject to the host country\u2019s minimum employment conditions. Remote work from abroad occurs when the employee performs their duties from another country without the employer providing cross-border services. The Posted Workers Directive does not apply, and social security coverage is determined under Article 13 of Regulation 883\/2004 (based on the proportion of working time spent in each country).<\/p>\n

                  What penalties apply if the cross-border work model is not properly regulated?<\/strong><\/p>\n

                  It depends on the type of violation. Illegally entrusting work to a foreign national carries a fine of PLN 3,000 to 50,000 (minimum PLN 3,000 per person), or a minimum of PLN 6,000 per person if the violation is intentional. Breaching the rules on the posting of workers carries a fine of PLN 1,000 to 30,000. Failure to register an employee with ZUS carries a fine of up to PLN 5,000 plus overdue contributions with interest. National Labour Inspectorate inspectors may impose fines of up to PLN 10,000. In extreme cases (facilitating illegal residence for financial gain), imprisonment for 3 months to 5 years may be imposed. Tax arrears and employee claims may also arise.<\/p>\n

                  Does the 24-day limit for occasional remote work protect the company against cross-border risks?<\/strong><\/p>\n

                  No. The limit of 24 days per calendar year (Article 67\u00b3\u00b3 of the Labour Code) concerns simplified employer obligations under Polish employment law \u2013 for example, some provisions on occupational health and safety and remote work costs do not have to be applied. This limit does not eliminate tax and social security risks arising under the laws of the country from which the employee actually works. Even a stay of several weeks abroad may trigger income tax or social security obligations in the country of stay \u2013 regardless of how the company classifies that period under the Polish Labour Code.<\/p>\n

                  How quickly can a mobility framework be implemented in a company?<\/strong><\/p>\n

                  Auditing current practices and creating a decision matrix takes 2\u20134 weeks. Preparing a remote work from abroad policy and expanding the regulations takes another 2\u20133 weeks (including consultation with employee representatives if the company does not have trade unions). Relocation checklists and allocation of responsibilities within a corporate group take 1\u20132 weeks. In total: from the audit to implementation of the basic framework, you need approximately 6\u20138 weeks. This should then be followed by a periodic review every 6 months.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                  Learn how a Polish tech company can assess posting, remote work abroad and local hiring, then build policies and checklists for cross-border teams.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":13,"featured_media":3814,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":"","sip_alt_url":"","sip_en_pl_url":"","sip_pair_uuid":"6de3b4b6-1029-47ca-8fec-ccdbc6aafee1","sip_pair_state":"verified"},"categories":[1442],"tags":[1530,1540,1558,1642,1549],"specialization":[1212],"practice_area":[],"class_list":["post-4352","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-labor-law","tag-b2b-agreement","tag-internal-procedure","tag-pip-en","tag-remote-work-en","tag-taxes-en","specialization-labor-law"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4352","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/13"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4352"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4352\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4355,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4352\/revisions\/4355"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3814"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4352"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4352"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4352"},{"taxonomy":"specialization","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/specialization?post=4352"},{"taxonomy":"practice_area","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/practice_area?post=4352"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}