The legislative digitalisation of the state is entering a decisive phase—the mandatory e-Delivery system has changed the rules of the game in correspondence with public authorities, while the National e-Invoicing System has introduced a new standard for documenting business transactions.
e-Delivery – why can failure to respond trigger legal consequences?
The e-Delivery system, regulated by the Act of 18 November 2020 on Electronic Deliveries, is gradually replacing traditional registered mail in communications between businesses and public administration bodies, courts, and other public entities. For companies and other entities entered in the National Court Register (KRS), this means the obligation to maintain an electronic delivery address and continuously monitor incoming correspondence. Communications sent to the address disclosed in the register may produce legal effects equivalent to those of traditional document service.
| Why is it important: If a message is not collected, after the statutory deadline has elapsed, a legal fiction of service may arise, meaning the document is deemed effectively delivered despite the recipient not having read it. Failure to regularly monitor the e-Delivery inbox may therefore lead to missed deadlines, restricted ability to defend one’s rights, or additional costs incurred by the company. |
It is crucial to designate people responsible for handling the inbox, implement substitution rules, and ensure ongoing monitoring of incoming correspondence. In digital communication with public authorities, merely possessing an e-Delivery address is not sufficient. It is equally important to ensure that no official message remains without response.
Why it matters – KR Group case study:
- A distribution-sector company correctly activated its e-Delivery address and began preparations for handling invoices within the National e-Invoicing System (KSeF).
- No individual was assigned permanent responsibility for monitoring electronic correspondence, no substitution rules were introduced for holidays or sick leave, and the internal approval workflow for documents was not clearly defined.
- A tax authority request concerning VAT settlements was delivered via the e-Delivery address.
- The letter was read with delay because the person usually responsible for administrative matters was absent.
- The company had to prepare explanations within a short timeframe while simultaneously organising documentation and reconstructing prior actions, which not only increased the workload but also reduced the procedural comfort of the business.
KSeF – a new standard of invoicing in business
The National e-Invoicing System (KSeF) is gradually becoming a mandatory tool for documenting business transactions. The new obligation is not only a matter of technical system access. An entrepreneur must determine who in the company is responsible for issuing invoices, who verifies their correctness, who approves cost documents, and who responds in the event of errors, system failure, or discrepancies with contractors.
An invoice issued outside KSeF, when the entrepreneur is already subject to the system, may generate significant tax and organisational risks. The consequences may affect both the correctness of VAT settlements and relationships with contractors who will expect documents issued in accordance with applicable rules.
Implementing KSeF also requires establishing internal invoice circulation procedures, training employees, defining cooperation principles with accounting service providers, and preparing contingency measures in case of system unavailability.
KR Group’s view: practical risk when digitalisation begins to affect business continuity
Both e-Delivery and KSeF place businesses in a phase where proper operation increasingly depends not only on knowledge of regulations but also on the efficiency of internal processes. Official correspondence, response deadlines, sales and cost invoices, document approvals, and information flow between management, employees, and accounting will increasingly operate in a digital environment where delays, lack of substitution, or unclear division of responsibilities may quickly translate into concrete legal and financial consequences.
Safe operation in a digital document environment requires continuous monitoring of correspondence, substitution rules, archiving of communications, efficient information flow, and a clear division of responsibilities among individuals involved in handling documents, invoices, and settlements.
If your organisation has not yet verified its practical readiness for e-Delivery and KSeF, it is worth doing so before the first issue reveals weaknesses in the process. A properly structured document workflow helps reduce the risk of missed deadlines, accounting errors, and disruptions in ongoing business operations.
