Will new personal investment-account law finally open Poland’s property market to retail investors?

Let’s analyse the government’s draft OKI regulations (osobiste konta inwestycyjne or personal investment accounts) to see if they could be the missing piece of the puzzle for Polish REITs (or rather their local equivalents) in 2026/2027.

The draft law on the OKI assumes that they will be launched as early as January 2027 and will introduce a voluntary investment ‘wrapper’ with a tax preference: no capital gains tax for income generated by assets held in an OKI, but in exchange for an annual tax on asset value above the exemption thresholds.

The exemption threshold is 100,000 złotys for investment assets and 25,000 złotys for savings assets (e.g. bank deposits and retail Treasury savings bonds). The tax rate is to equal 19% of the NBP reference rate (based on the level applicable on 31 October of the preceding year), provided that it may not be lower than 0.1%; for 2027 it has been communicated at approximately 0.85%.

Polish-style REITs: why the topic keeps coming back
A REIT (Real Estate Investment Trust), in its classic form, is a simple mechanism: the investor buys an interest (most often shares in a listed company) and in return gains exposure to a portfolio of income-producing real estate generating rental income – without having to buy an apartment independently, look for a tenant, and deal with renovations. Two features are key:  a dividend model (in many jurisdictions, an obligation to distribute a significant portion of profit) and a special tax regime, usually favouring the ‘pass-through’ of income to the investor.

In Poland, the discussion has been ongoing at least since the old FINN project (firma inwestująca w najem nieruchomości – literally, firm investing in rental property) and has recently returned under the banner of SINN (społka inwestująca w najem nieruchomości – company investing in rental property). Various assumptions behind these solutions have appeared in government statements and in the trade press, but so far there has been no stable, final legislative text and no clarity as to taxation and the range of permissible assets.

The idea has a long history; investors have been patient and they keep on waiting…

What are the causes of the evident legislative deadlock in this area? First, as usual – taxes and the question of who, when and on what basis will pay tax, and whether the preference will not prove too costly for the state budget. Second – concerns about the housing market – whether institutional vehicles would drive up already elevated housing prices. Third – investor protection, that is, ensuring valuation transparency, leverage limits and adequate disclosure obligations. And finally – liquidity, even the best legal framework will not function if there is not a sufficient mass of investors willing to buy and hold these instruments. And this is precisely where OKI may become part of the solution.

OKI in a nutshell: what the government is really proposing
Government communications reaching the public sphere indicate that OKI is to be a voluntary investment account for adults, offered, among others, by banks, brokerage houses, investment fund companies, insurance undertakings and voluntary pension funds. OKI is not to be burdened with fees for opening the account, making contributions or withdrawals. It is also important that one person may hold more than one OKI and that the funds are to remain accessible at any time.

The government expressly points to the Swedish Investeringssparkonto (ISK) as inspiration – a structure in which, instead of classic taxation of profit, taxation is based on asset value. For market practice, this is important: OKI is not merely a tax relief, but an operational project requiring standardised portfolio valuation and reporting (including to the tax administration).

From a legal perspective, the most interesting feature is that the project does not so much abolish taxation as reconstruct it. Income (revenue) from assets held in an OKI (e.g. interest or dividends) would not be subject to capital gains tax, but in exchange a tax on the value of the assets (calculated annually) would apply – while specified assets would remain exempt up to statutory monetary thresholds.

OKI and REITs/SINN: substance or just marketing?
Strictly speaking, OKI is not a project ‘about real estate’ – it is rather a type of ‘tax wrapper for investments’. But such a ‘wrapper’ can be crucial for the capital market. If the incentives work, more retail investors will move part of their savings from deposits into listed instruments and funds. The government expressly describes the goal as increasing market liquidity and bringing additional capital to the Warsaw Stock Exchange.

OKI, however, does not answer questions fundamental to a Polish REIT/SINN regime: whether, and on what terms, the company is to benefit from tax preference; what the profit distribution obligation should be; which assets are eligible; whether development activity is permissible; what the leverage (LTV) cap should be; how valuations and disclosure obligations should be structured; and what oversight should be exercised by the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF). These are the elements of a ‘core’ REIT/SINN statute, without which OKI remains only a step in the right direction rather than a genuine real-estate investment product.

Legal flashpoints in the OKI project – list of issues
Here’s a legislative checklist for REIT/SINN – what needs to happen beyond OKI

• Tax regime at company level: without a clear decision on whether (and on what conditions) a REIT/SINN should benefit from a CIT preference and how distributions to investors are to be taxed, the instrument will not be ‘dividend-predictable’.
• Distribution obligation: if this is to be a rental-income product, the market expects dividend rules; without them a REIT begins to resemble an ordinary real estate company.
• Eligible assets and prohibition on ‘mixing’ business models: in other words, an answer to the question whether the portfolio should be dominated by income-generating rental assets, and whether development activity should be allowed and, if so, to what extent and on what terms.
• Leverage (LTV) and financing policy: statutory leverage brakes and refinancing rules, i.e. legal safeguards – because this is usually the main source of risk in real estate vehicles.
• Valuations and independent control: valuation standards (frequency, independent appraisers, disclosure of methodology).
• Corporate governance and conflicts of interest: rules on related-party transactions, managers’ remuneration and policies for acquiring/disposing of assets.
• Supervision and disclosure obligations: the role of the Polish Financial Supervision Authority, prospectus/reporting obligations.
• Scope of ‘eligible assets’: the devil is usually in the annexes and definitions. Whether a broad catalogue of listed instruments can be held in an OKI will determine the account’s real usefulness for investors.
• Costs and ‘free of charge’ operation: while the core activities are to be free in principle, in practice what matters are management fees, spreads, brokerage commissions and product costs.
• Relationship with existing regimes (IKE/IKZE/OIPE): is OKI meant to be an alternative, an overlay, or a competing product? Will the system of tax incentives remain coherent?
• Settlements through the e-Tax Office: the draft assumes the use of the e-Tax Office for tax settlements, so key issues will include the scope of data reported by institutions, reporting timetables, liability for errors, and the ‘tax point’ for withdrawals and transfers.

What next – three scenarios for Polish REITs/SINN after OKI enters into force:

1. Optimistic scenario: OKI quickly popularises equity investing, and the retail market begins to look for stable dividends. In such an environment, it becomes easier to carry out IPOs of future REIT/SINN vehicles and to maintain trading liquidity.
2. Moderate scenario – ‘legislation first’: OKI works moderately well but builds the case, including the political case, that if we have a mass-market investment account, investors should also be offered a sensible real-estate product with a clear legal regime. In that case, REIT/SINN becomes the logical end result, but one that still requires work on taxation and supervision.
3. Cautious scenario: OKI is introduced, but without broad financial education and with high sensitivity to the ‘asset value tax’. As a result, there is no critical mass of investors, and REIT/SINN remains a project that is politically too difficult and fiscally too risky.

Conclusion: OKI is a necessary, but insufficient condition
Looking at OKI objectively, it’s an ambitious project intended to change investor behaviours. It may also prove attractive for long-term and dividend investing – exactly the kind of fuel ‘Polish REITs ‘need.

But even the best investment account cannot replace a REIT/SINN statute. At most, OKI can create better boundary conditions, a larger pool of investors, greater acceptance of listed instruments and greater sensitivity to dividends as a source of income. Whether Polish REITs finally emerge will still depend on classic questions – the details of legislation, namely the tax regime at company level, distribution obligations, risk limitations and transparency. Using a real-estate metaphor, OKI appears more like a foundation for construction than the constructed building itself.

The government is planning to go through the legislative proceedings by January 2027.