Guide · HR and payroll
Updated: · 8 min read · By Agnieszka Saladra, Certified Accountant
The choice of the form of cooperation has real consequences for contributions, taxes and the scope of protection. Whether the case involves an employment contract, mandate contract or B2B affects the costs on both sides, the right to leave, the rules of termination, and the risk of a dispute with ZUS or the labour inspectorate (PIP). Below we compare these three forms neutrally - we present the figures and differences, and the decision is yours.
In short
An employment contract, a mandate contract and B2B cooperation differ already at the level of their legal basis. An employment contract is governed by the Labour Code and creates an employment relationship with the subordination of the employee to the employer. A mandate contract (umowa zlecenia) is a civil-law contract under the Civil Code, in which the contractor performs specified tasks with due diligence. B2B (cooperation between companies) is a contract concluded by an entrepreneur running a sole proprietorship with another entity - here there is no employee or employer, only two parties in business dealings.
Most practical consequences follow from this difference: the scope of protection, the method of calculating contributions, the form of taxation, and who settles ZUS and tax. In our accounting office, we most often explain that none of the forms is by definition better - each distributes costs, obligations and risks differently.
The most contribution obligations are associated with an employment contract. On the gross salary, the employer finances part of the contributions from its own funds: pension (9.76%), disability (6.5%), accident (the rate is set for the individual payer, e.g. 1.67%), as well as the Labour Fund and the Solidarity Fund (2.45% in total) and the Guaranteed Employee Benefits Fund (0.10%). In addition there are payments to the Employee Capital Plans (PPK), if the employee has not opted out. This is why the real cost of employment is significantly higher than the gross amount in the contract.
Under a mandate contract, the principal may also finance part of the social contributions, and the scope of contributions depends on the contractor's situation (discussed below). If the contractor is subject to mandatory pension and disability insurance, the Guaranteed Employee Benefits Fund (0.10%) and the Labour Fund and the Solidarity Fund (2.45% in total, where the base converted to a monthly amount reaches the minimum wage) also apply, and the contractor is covered by PPK. Under B2B, the employing party generally does not pay any ZUS contributions for the collaborator - it only pays the agreed remuneration (most often on the basis of an invoice), and the entrepreneur settles contributions and tax themselves.
Under an employment contract and a mandate contract, income is generally taxed under the tax scale (12% up to a base of PLN 120,000 and 32% above), and the payer collects advances. They differ in the way tax-deductible costs are calculated.
Under B2B, the entrepreneur chooses the form of taxation: the tax scale, the flat tax (19%) or the lump-sum tax on recorded revenue. They may also deduct real business costs (except under the lump-sum tax, where tax is calculated on revenue). This means greater flexibility of settlement, but also more obligations - recordkeeping, timely advances, the annual return. The specific amounts depend on many variables, so a comparison of the variants is best based on figures from your situation.
Here the differences are the greatest. An employment contract provides the broadest protection: the right to paid holiday leave (20 or 26 days depending on seniority), special-occasion leave, sick pay and benefits, statutory notice periods, and protection during, among others, pregnancy. Termination of an indefinite-term contract by the employer requires justification.
Under a mandate contract and B2B, these guarantees generally do not apply. Paid leave is not granted by operation of law - a break in work usually means no remuneration, unless the parties stipulate otherwise in the contract. A mandate contract can essentially be terminated at any time (unless the contract states otherwise), and B2B cooperation ends on the terms set out in the contract, without the protection of the Labour Code. The right to sickness benefit under a mandate contract and B2B depends on voluntary sickness insurance.
It is worth bearing in mind the change introduced by the Act of 26 September 2025 amending the Labour Code and certain other acts (Dz.U. 2025 item 1423): periods of work under a mandate contract and of running business activity count towards employment seniority - in public finance sector entities from 1 January 2026, and with all other employers from 1 May 2026. Periods completed before those dates also count, but the employee has to document them, for instance with a certificate from ZUS. This affects, among other things, the amount of leave and the length of the notice period when a given person later moves to employment.
Under a mandate contract, the key question is whether social contributions are mandatory or not. This is determined by the so-called overlap of insurance titles. If the contractor simultaneously has another title (e.g. employment) and earns from it at least the minimum wage - in 2026, PLN 4,806 gross - then, as a rule, only the health insurance contribution is mandatory under the mandate contract. The overlap of titles does not apply where the mandate contract was concluded with the contractor's own employer, or the work is performed for that employer's benefit - the contractor is then treated as an employee and the mandate is subject to contributions in the same way as employment.
If, however, the contractor earns less than the minimum wage from another title, the mandate contract is usually subject to full social-security contributions. Similarly, with several mandate contracts - mandatory social contributions are, as a rule, calculated from the first (or chosen) contract, and the others may be exempt from them, provided that at least the minimum wage is earned from the earlier one.
The forms also differ in the level of freedom. An employment contract by nature assumes subordination - the employer determines the place, time and manner of work, and in return provides stability and social protection. A mandate contract is more flexible, although it remains a contract for the provision of services. B2B gives the most independence: the entrepreneur organises the work themselves, bears the economic risk, may serve many contractors and decides on the manner of performing the task.
This freedom under B2B has, however, a legal limit. If the cooperation in practice looks like employment - fixed hours, one location, organisational subordination, no economic risk - then, despite the name of the contract, it may be deemed an employment relationship. This leads us to the most important B2B risk in 2026.
Self-employment is legal, but it cannot apparently replace employment. An employment relationship is determined not by the name of the contract, but by the actual way it is performed. The more the cooperation resembles subordinate work, the greater the risk of its reclassification. As an aid, the so-called self-employment test is used - a set of features distinguishing genuine business activity from hidden employment.
Since 8 July 2026, the amendment to the Act on the State Labour Inspectorate has been in force (the Act of 11 March 2026, Dz.U. 2026 item 473). The inspector first issues an order to remedy the infringements, and if the company does not comply with it, the district labour inspector may issue a decision establishing the existence of an employment relationship - with consequences in labour law, taxes and insurance; an appeal against that decision is heard by the labour court. The amendment also broadens the exchange of data between PIP, ZUS and the tax administration (KAS). The statutory definition of an employment relationship (Article 22 of the Labour Code) has not changed, and properly concluded civil-law contracts remain permissible - what counts is whether the content of the contract matches day-to-day practice. The effects of reclassification include, among others, overdue contributions and advances as well as corrections to settlements. Given the pace of change, the current state of the regulations is worth confirming with PIP, ZUS and on biznes.gov.pl.
There is no universally more advantageous form - the outcome depends on the level of income, the scope of duties, the need for social protection, and how the cooperation actually looks. Employment provides the broadest protection, while B2B offers greater flexibility of settlement, but also more obligations.
At Luno-Group, as an online accounting office, we will calculate and compare the effects of the individual forms based on figures from your situation, and present the differences in contributions, taxes and costs. We do not indicate a single variant - you make the decision, with clear calculations in front of you. Also remember that the choice of the form of employment has a legal dimension (PIP, labour law) that goes beyond accounting settlements.
An employment contract is subject to the Labour Code and provides the broadest protection (leave, notice periods, benefits). A mandate contract is a civil-law contract under the Civil Code with narrower protection. B2B is cooperation between companies outside the Labour Code, where the entrepreneur settles contributions and tax themselves.
As a rule, an employment contract generates the highest costs for the employing party (full contributions, the Guaranteed Employee Benefits Fund, often PPK), a mandate contract tends to be cheaper - although when the contractor is subject to mandatory pension and disability insurance, the Guaranteed Employee Benefits Fund, the Labour Fund/Solidarity Fund and PPK apply here too - and under B2B the employing party pays only the invoice without ZUS contributions. This, however, is only one of the parameters - the scope of protection and legal risks differ, so the comparison is worth making holistically.
There is no single answer - the outcome depends on the level of income, the scope of duties, the need for social protection and the way the work is performed. Employment provides the broadest protection, while B2B offers greater flexibility of settlement, but also more obligations. We can calculate and compare the variants using your figures, and you make the decision yourself.
The overlap of insurance titles is decisive. If the contractor has employment with another employer with remuneration of at least the minimum (in 2026, PLN 4,806 gross), then, as a rule, only the health insurance contribution is mandatory under the mandate. When they earn less, the mandate is usually subject to full social-security contributions. A mandate contract concluded with the contractor's own employer, or performed for that employer's benefit, is subject to contributions in the same way as employment.
The main risk is an apparent B2B being deemed an employment relationship. If the cooperation in practice looks like employment (rigid hours, one location, subordination, no economic risk), it may be reclassified. From 8 July 2026, the district labour inspector may establish the existence of an employment relationship by administrative decision if the company does not comply with an order to remedy the infringements; an appeal against that decision is heard by the labour court. The current regulations are worth confirming with PIP and on biznes.gov.pl.
As a rule, no. Paid holiday leave is an entitlement under an employment contract (20 or 26 days). Under a mandate contract and B2B, a break in work usually means no remuneration, unless the parties stipulate a paid break in the contract. The right to sickness benefit under these forms depends on voluntary sickness insurance.