B2B in IT: A market standard under regulatory review

At Netminds , we work with teams across several countries. Our specialists collaborate with us under different cooperation models, which reflects the international nature of our work and the markets we operate in.

Our clients will never notice, but today we have to use around nine different contract models with our employees and contractors across several countries. B2B is one of our key formats — especially in international collaboration, where flexibility, autonomy, and cross-border cooperation are essential. That is why we pay close attention to regulatory developments and ongoing discussions around B2B in the regions where we operate.

As a significant part of our team is based in the European Union, Poland has naturally become one of the countries where these discussions are especially relevant.

Why B2B still matters in IT - The Polish context

The IT market without B2B would look completely different.

B2B enables:

• flexibility and access to international markets;

• autonomy for specialists and the ability to influence their working format;

• faster decision-making and quicker project launches;

• a win-win model in which both sides benefit.

This is why B2B has been a core part of how the IT market has worked for many years.

However, in recent months in Poland, public and professional attention around B2B contracts has increased. This includes discussions about a draft law that proposed expanding the role of the State Labour Inspectorate (Państwowa Inspekcja Pracy, PIP). This topic has been actively discussed in professional circles and has generated strong interest from the business community.

The key question for both companies and specialists is whether B2B cooperation can be reclassified, and what this would mean in practice.

What was proposed in the draft law

The main focus of the draft law was the expansion of PIP’s powers. Under the proposal, PIP could have been allowed to:

• independently, through an administrative process, decide that a civil-law or B2B contract should be treated as an employment relationship, without referring the case to court;

• issue decisions that would take effect immediately, even if one of the parties (a company or a contractor) appealed;

• apply the so-called “entrepreneur test” to determine whether a contract is genuinely business-based or closer to employment  (e.g., subordination, fixed working hours or location, lack of business risk for the contractor, etc.).

If PIP were to recognize the relationship as employment rather than entrepreneurial, this could have consequences for both sides:

For the company

• obligation to switch to an employment contract (Umowa o pracę);

• additional tax and social security obligations applying from the date of the administrative decision;

• potentially, recalculation of payments covering past periods for up to three years (including contributions, paid leave, etc.);

• immediate financial and organizational impact before a court decision.

For the specialist

• loss of key advantages of the B2B structure, such as tax efficiency and autonomy;

• possible tax recalculation as an employee (PIT) rather than as an entrepreneur;

• loss of the right to deduct business expenses and other benefits available to the self-employed.

The draft law assumed that appeals would be possible, but that the inspector’s decision would have applied immediately, until a final court ruling.

The broader idea of the reform was to allow inspectors to quickly and directly determine the actual nature of cooperation, rather than relying on lengthy court proceedings, and to improve coordination between PIP, tax authorities, and ZUS during inspections and data exchange.

Why this remains important despite the legislative pause

At present, the draft law has been postponed and was not adopted in its original form. However, the overall direction is already clear: there is growing attention to ensuring that cooperation models reflect how work is actually performed in practice. 

For the IT sector, this topic is particularly sensitive because B2B is a market standard - a normal and widely used form of cooperation. That is why changes in how B2B contracts are structured are a natural next step to better align with market practices and evolving regulatory expectations.

In many companies, contracts tend to stay the same even as external expectations and regulatory focus evolve. As a result, contracts are not always revisited with the same attention as the environment around them.

For us as a company, reviewing and improving B2B contracts is a practical decision. It helps us to better align contracts with day-to-day work, remove grey areas that tend to cause confusion later, clarify roles, responsibilities, confidentiality, and levels of autonomy.

We aim to make sure our contracts accurately reflect how cooperation is structured in current conditions and support clear and predictable collaboration. A well-designed B2B contract is a practical tool that helps avoid misunderstandings, set realistic expectations, and balance the interests of both the company and the specialists.

Olena Ruda , CFO at Netminds