Cross-Border Work in a Polish Technology Company: How to Build a Global Mobility Framework
Your CTO works from Lisbon. A senior developer provides services as an independent B2B contractor from Berlin. A new product manager wants to spend three months working from Barcelona. You approved each arrangement on different terms—but who handles the formalities? Have tax obligations arisen? Could ZUS, Poland’s Social Insurance Institution, challenge the social security arrangements?
For technology companies, global mobility—the management of cross-border work—often grows faster than the policies governing it. More than 90% of IT professionals work remotely or in a hybrid arrangement, while the sector faces a shortage of approximately 147,000 specialists. International recruitment and working remotely from another country are routine. Each decision made without a consistent process can add to the company’s operational legal debt.
This article explains the main work models and their consequences, then sets out a practical framework for managing international teams from a Polish company.
Key terms
Different cross-border arrangements create different obligations. The starting point is to identify what is actually happening—not simply how the company has labeled it.
| Term | Meaning | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Posting of workers | Temporarily sending an employee to work in another EU country as part of the employer’s provision of services. | A Polish company sends a developer to Germany for six months to deliver a client project. |
| Remote work from abroad | An employee works from another country without the employer providing cross-border services there. | A developer works from Lisbon for a Polish employer. |
| Local employment | A person is employed in the country where they work. | A Polish company employs a candidate living and working in Barcelona. |
| A1 certificate | A document confirming which EU country’s social security legislation applies to a worker. | Relevant to postings, work in multiple countries, and remote work from abroad. |
| Permanent establishment (PE) | A presence through which a company conducts business in another country, potentially creating a corporate tax obligation there. | Business decisions made by an employee from a home office abroad may raise a PE question for the employer. |
| Employer of Record (EOR) | An external provider that formally employs a person in a country on behalf of the company using their services. | A company hires a specialist in the Netherlands without establishing its own company there. |
Three cross-border work models and their legal consequences
Treating remote work from abroad as a posting, or an employment relationship as independent B2B services, can lead to unpaid social security contributions, tax arrears, and administrative penalties. The distinction matters from the outset.
Posting employees to another EU country
Posting is governed by Directive 96/71/EC, as amended by Directive (EU) 2018/957 (with an implementation deadline of July 30, 2020). Poland’s Act of June 10, 2016 on the Posting of Workers in the Framework of the Provision of Services implements these rules nationally.
Key rules include:
- “Same work, same pay.” A posted employee must receive the remuneration applicable in the host country for the relevant industry and region—not merely a minimum rate.
- Up to 12 months, or 18 months following a reasoned notification, the set of employment conditions under Article 3 of the directive applies. It covers working time, leave, remuneration, occupational health and safety, and equal treatment.
- After 12 or 18 months, almost all host-country employment law provisions apply, except rules on entering into and terminating employment contracts and on supplementary occupational retirement pension schemes.
- A posted employee may remain in the Polish social security system for up to 24 months under Article 12 of Regulation 883/2004, provided an A1 certificate is obtained from ZUS.
- The 12- or 18-month period includes successive employees replacing one another in the same position. Rotating personnel does not reset the limit.
For postings into Poland, administrative obligations include filing a declaration with PIP, Poland’s National Labour Inspectorate, no later than the day the service starts; appointing a contact person for PIP; and retaining the employment contract, working-time records, and evidence of remuneration. During the posting, the documents must be made available within five business days.
Remote work from abroad
There is no separate EU directive governing remote work from abroad. Where the employer is not providing cross-border services, Directive 96/71/EC on posting does not apply.
The definition of remote work in the Polish Labor Code, effective April 7, 2023, is territorially neutral: it covers work at a location specified by the employee and agreed with the employer each time. It does not formally exclude a location abroad, but it does not resolve the cross-border consequences.
The company therefore needs to assess several issues separately:
- Employment law: Mandatory provisions of the country from which the work is actually performed apply under Article 8 of the Rome I Regulation.
- Social security: Article 13 of Regulation 883/2004 addresses work in more than one country. If at least 25% of working time is in the employee’s country of residence, that country’s social security system applies.
- Cross-border telework agreement: Since July 1, 2023, the Framework Agreement on cross-border telework has applied in Poland. Where remote work from the country of residence represents 25–49.9% of total working time, it may be possible to retain Polish social security coverage through a US-36 application to ZUS and an A1 certificate.
Poland’s occasional remote work rules are a separate matter. Article 67³³ of the Labor Code limits occasional remote work to 24 days per calendar year. Calling a several-week stay abroad “occasional remote work” does not remove tax or social security risks under the rules of the country where the employee actually works.
Local employment
Under this model, the employee is subject to the employment law and social security system of the country where they work, in line with Article 11 of Regulation 883/2004. The Posted Workers Directive does not apply.
For the Polish company, this requires establishing a company or branch in the destination country, or using an EOR.
Tax and social security thresholds to examine
Time spent abroad is important, but it is not the only factor. A company with employees working from Germany, Spain, or Portugal should assess tax residence, treaty rules, social security coverage, and possible PE exposure for each arrangement.
The approved source summarizes selected tax points as follows. Its Portugal tax-residence entry gives resident tax-rate and NHR information rather than a residence-day threshold; no separate Portugal threshold is supplied.
| Parameter | Germany | Spain | Portugal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tax residence | Habitual residence for more than approximately six months in a year, or having a place of residence. | More than 183 days in a calendar year, or a center of economic interests. | Progressive rates of 14.5–48%; the NHR program is described as offering 10 years of preferential treatment for new residents. |
| 183-day rule under a double tax treaty | A stay of fewer than 183 days, remuneration from a Polish employer, and no PE in Germany → taxation only in Poland. | A stay of fewer than 183 days → generally no tax obligation in Spain. | No detailed information in the Polish-language sources. |
| Nonresident rate | Depends on the progressive scale; the source notes quasi-residence where 90% of income is earned in Germany. | IRNR: 24%, or 19% for EU/EEA cases if the conditions are met. | No data provided. |
| PE threshold for a construction site | 12 months under the double tax treaty; six months for Lohnsteuer (German wage tax). | Depends on the nature of the activity. | No data provided. |
The social security thresholds discussed in the source arise from EU coordination rules and the cross-border telework framework:
| Threshold | Significance |
|---|---|
| 24 months | Maximum posting period described for remaining in the Polish ZUS system under Article 12 of Regulation 883/2004. |
| 25% of working time | Working at least this proportion in the country of residence brings that country’s system into play under Article 13. |
| 25–49.9% of working time | Range addressed by the Framework Agreement on cross-border telework, allowing for the possibility of continued Polish coverage. |
| 5% of working time | Marginal work, disregarded when determining the applicable social security legislation. |
These figures are screening points, not a substitute for examining the person’s work pattern and the relevant country. Contact us if you need to verify which social security system should cover remote employees.
The cost of getting the model wrong
A missing mobility process does not, by itself, produce a single standard penalty. The financial consequences depend on the underlying breach. For a company dealing with Poland, they may include fines, overdue contributions and taxes, employee claims, and, in some circumstances, personal liability for management board members.
Poland: employment of foreign nationals
The Polish Act of March 20, 2025 on the Conditions for Admitting Foreign Nationals to Work, effective June 1, 2025, introduced higher sanctions:
| Violation | Penalty |
|---|---|
| Illegally assigning work to a foreign national | PLN 3,000–50,000, with a minimum of PLN 3,000 per person |
| Intentional violation, exploitation, or deception | Minimum PLN 6,000 per person |
| Fine imposed by a PIP inspector | Up to PLN 10,000 |
| Documentation violations | PLN 1,000–3,000 |
| Foreign national working illegally | Minimum PLN 1,000 |
| Assigning work through an illegal agency | Minimum PLN 6,000 |
Poland: employment law, posting, and ZUS
| Violation | Penalty |
|---|---|
| Failure to provide written confirmation of an employment contract (Article 281 of the Labor Code) | PLN 1,000–30,000 |
| Breaches concerning remuneration, leave, or employment certificates (Article 282 of the Labor Code) | PLN 1,000–30,000 |
| Occupational health and safety breaches (Article 283 of the Labor Code) | PLN 1,000–30,000 |
| Breach of obligations under the Act on the Posting of Workers | PLN 1,000–30,000 |
| Failure to register an employee with ZUS | Up to PLN 5,000, plus overdue contributions with interest |
Under Article 264a of the Polish Criminal Code, enabling or facilitating illegal residence for financial gain carries three months to five years’ imprisonment.
The penalty tables do not capture every consequence. These may also include overdue ZUS contributions for up to five previous years, tax arrears with interest, and claims by employees for benefits under the employment law of the country where they actually worked.
Choosing a cross-border engagement model
A posting, local company, independent B2B contract, and EOR arrangement serve different business needs. The comparison below is a planning guide; the legal and tax position still needs to be assessed for the arrangement in question.
| Criterion | Posting | Local employment through your company | Foreign B2B contractor | EOR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Typical setup time | Days to weeks, including A1 and other formalities | Months to register a company | Days | Days to weeks |
| Control over the person’s work | Full employment relationship | Full employment relationship | Limited; reclassification risk | Limited; EOR is the formal employer |
| Social security | Poland for up to 24 months under the posting model described | Destination country | Contractor is responsible | Destination country; EOR handles registration |
| PE risk, as characterized in the source | Low because the arrangement is temporary | None in this comparison because there is a local company | Low | Low, depending on the structure |
| Risk of reclassification as employment | None in this comparison | None in this comparison | High | Low |
| Scalability | Low because of time limits | High, but expensive | Medium | High |
| Fixed cost | Low | High: maintaining a local company | Low | EOR fee |
| Best suited to | Temporary projects, up to 24 months | A lasting presence in the country | Independent specialists and short projects | Hiring quickly without your own company in the country |
Pay particular attention to B2B arrangements. Contracting with an independent business is common in IT, but Polish authorities—including PIP and ZUS—and authorities in the contractor’s country of work may question whether the relationship is actually employment. Exclusivity, fixed working hours, and use of the company’s tools are warning signs identified in the source.
Building a global mobility framework: seven steps
You do not need to begin with a 200-page analysis. Start with visibility, decision rules, a process owner, and repeatable checklists.
1. Audit current arrangements
Create one register covering every employee and contractor who works across borders:
| Employee or contractor | Country of work | Engagement model | Time working abroad | Owner of formalities | A1 or registration status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| To complete | To complete | To complete | To complete | To complete | To complete |
The purpose is to establish how many arrangements exist, which countries are involved, who owns each task, and where documentation or registrations may be missing.
2. Create a decision matrix for new requests
Before approving another move or hire, assess:
- Duration: short-term (under three months), medium-term (three to 12 months), or long-term (over 12 months).
- Relationship: employment or genuinely independent services.
- Company presence: an existing company or branch in the destination country, or neither.
- Tax exposure: the relevance of the 183-day threshold and possible PE risk.
- Cost and scalability: whether the model can be repeated for future hires.
Use the answers to evaluate posting, local employment, EOR, or B2B rather than choosing a label first and examining the consequences later.
3. Add a working-from-abroad policy
A Polish employer’s remote work policy or agreement under the Labor Code rules effective April 7, 2023 is a natural place to address work from abroad. Standard remote work rules may not cover it.
Include:
- A maximum period for work from each country—for example, 30 days per calendar year, which the source presents as below tax and social security thresholds in most EU jurisdictions.
- An application and approval process: who requests permission, who decides, and how far before departure the request is due.
- Grounds for refusal: such as high tax risk, no double tax treaty, or inability to verify social security obligations.
- Employee reporting duties: the country, dates, work address, and commitment to observe the approved limit.
- A response to overruns: what happens if the person remains abroad longer than approved.
Also account for Article 29¹ § 2 of the Polish Labor Code. When an employee goes abroad to work for more than four consecutive weeks, the employer must provide additional information about the country of work, the currency of remuneration, benefits connected with work abroad, and the conditions for return.
4. Give one person ownership of the process
Appoint a mobility coordinator—for example, a Head of People Operations. This person does not replace HR, payroll, legal counsel, managers, or local advisers. They make sure those parties act together.
Their responsibilities should include internal coordination; working with advisers in destination countries; maintaining the register of active cases; and reviewing arrangements and legal changes every six months.
5. Divide responsibilities across the corporate group
If the business operates through several group companies, record who does what. A written responsibility matrix can prevent headquarters and the local company from each assuming the other has completed a filing.
| Obligation | Headquarters | Local company | External adviser |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immigration formalities | Coordinates | Carries out | Provides specialist support |
| Tax registrations | Decides | Carries out | Analyzes and advises |
| Employment contract or amendment | Provides template | Signs | Reviews |
| Payroll and contributions | Oversees | Carries out | Audits |
| A1 certificate | Applies | — | Supports |
Without an allocation, an A1 application may never be filed and the employee may not be registered in the relevant local social security system.
6. Prepare checklists for recurring scenarios
Start with the cases most likely to recur:
- Remote work from abroad for up to three months: employee request, tax and social security review, approval decision, and monitoring of days worked.
- Relocation within a corporate group: posting versus local employment analysis, division of headquarters and local-company tasks, immigration formalities, A1 or a change in social security coverage, and contract amendment.
- Hiring a candidate abroad: EOR versus B2B versus a local company, cost analysis, onboarding, and registrations.
7. Explain the rules to employees and managers
An internal FAQ should answer: Can I work abroad, and on what terms? Where do I apply? How many days are permitted in a particular country? What happens if I exceed the limit? Will the company pay for additional insurance or tax advice?
Clear communication helps prevent employees from making arrangements independently and notifying the business only after a problem has arisen.
How we can help
Global mobility for a technology company connects employment law, tax, social security, immigration, and corporate governance. A decision about how to engage one specialist abroad can affect all of them.
We support technology companies by:
- Auditing existing arrangements and identifying gaps and risks.
- Designing a decision matrix for posting, local employment, EOR, and B2B scenarios.
- Preparing a working-from-abroad policy with approval procedures and limits.
- Allocating responsibilities within corporate groups through a written matrix.
- Creating relocation and onboarding checklists for recurring cases.
- Coordinating with local legal and tax advisers in destination countries.
The aim is to align workforce decisions with the company’s ownership structure, growth plans, and operating model—not to treat each request to work abroad as an isolated exception.
Put the framework in place before growth makes it harder
A company whose international team grows faster than its work policies can discover the cost during an inspection, an employment dispute, or an investor’s review. Each undocumented cross-border arrangement may add exposure to unpaid contributions, tax arrears, and administrative penalties.
Begin with an audit, a decision matrix, a working-from-abroad policy, and one process owner. Build the checklists, division of responsibilities, and internal guidance around that foundation.
If your team works across several countries, contact us. We can identify the main risk areas and help you decide where to start.
Frequently asked questions
Does two months of work from Portugal automatically create tax or social security obligations there?
Not automatically, but the arrangement needs individual analysis. The source notes that where work from Portugal is less than 25% of total working time, the employee generally remains in the Polish ZUS system; a higher proportion may bring Portuguese social security coverage into question. For tax, the source cites Portugal’s progressive resident rates of 14.5–48%. Residence thresholds or a move in the person’s center of vital interests may affect tax residence. The Polish company should also assess possible PE exposure in Portugal.
Who should own mobility within the company?
One designated person, commonly the Head of People Operations, HR Director, or COO. They should maintain the full view of the arrangement: model, documents, responsibilities, deadlines, and communication. External counsel can provide specialist support, but operational decisions must remain with the company.
How is posting different from remote work abroad?
Posting under Directive 96/71/EC involves an employer temporarily sending an employee to another EU country to provide services—for example, on a foreign client project. The host country’s posting-related employment conditions apply, and the employee may remain in Polish social security for up to 24 months with an A1 certificate.
Remote work abroad, as described here, does not involve the employer providing cross-border services. The posting directive therefore does not apply. Social security coverage is assessed under Article 13 of Regulation 883/2004, based on the work pattern across countries.
What penalties can follow an improperly managed arrangement?
The answer depends on the breach. In Poland, illegally assigning work to a foreign national can result in a PLN 3,000–50,000 fine, with a minimum of PLN 3,000 per person; the source identifies a minimum of PLN 6,000 per person for an intentional violation. Breaching posting obligations can lead to PLN 1,000–30,000 in fines. Failure to register an employee with ZUS can lead to a fine of up to PLN 5,000, plus overdue contributions and interest. PIP inspectors can impose fines of up to PLN 10,000. In the circumstances covered by Article 264a of the Criminal Code, facilitating illegal residence for financial gain can carry three months to five years’ imprisonment. Tax arrears and employee claims may arise separately.
Does Poland’s 24-day occasional remote work allowance remove cross-border risks?
No. The 24 days per calendar year under Article 67³³ of the Polish Labor Code concern simplified employer obligations under Polish remote work rules, including certain occupational health and safety and cost provisions. They do not remove tax or social security obligations that may arise in the country where the person actually works. Even a stay of several weeks can require review.
How long does it take to implement a basic framework?
The source estimates two to four weeks for the audit and decision matrix, followed by two to three weeks for the working-from-abroad policy and remote work rules, including consultation with employee representatives where the company has no trade unions. Relocation checklists and group responsibility allocation may take another one to two weeks. In total, a basic framework can take approximately six to eight weeks, followed by a review every six months.