The introduction of a deposit return system may raise questions regarding the tax consequences of unredeemed deposits for packaging. One such issue, raised by a local government cultural institution, was the subject of an individual tax ruling issued by the Director of the National Tax Information (KIS) on 25 May 2026 (reference number 0111-KDIB1-3.4010.143.2026.1.JG).
The case concerned a municipal cultural institution that, as part of its activity, organizes cultural, sports, and recreational events. These include music concerts, cycling rallies, road races, and sports matches. During such events, the institution provides beverages subject to the deposit return system. However, the institution does not require artists or participants to return beverage containers, which are therefore often taken away or crushed.
As a result, the applicant questioned whether it would be possible to recognize as tax-deductible costs the expenses related to paying deposits in cases where their recovery is impossible due to the loss or destruction of containers covered by the deposit system.
The institution initially took the position that, in principle, deposit payments do not constitute tax-deductible costs due to their refundable nature, meaning the requirement of definitiveness is not met. However, in the described case, the institution argued that the expense had become final because the containers subject to return were destroyed or taken by participants, making it impossible to recover the deposit. Therefore, in its view, such expenses could be treated as tax-deductible costs.
The Director of the National Tax Information confirmed the applicant’s position. The authority emphasized that expenses should primarily be assessed in terms of their purposefulness, which is a key criterion in determining whether a cost can be recognized for tax purposes. In this case, the provision of beverages was directly related to the events organized as part of the institution’s statutory activities. The inability to recover the deposit due to the loss or destruction of containers was considered a consequence of justified operational risk inherent in such activities. Accordingly, the authority concluded that such deposit expenses may be included in tax-deductible costs.
The ruling confirms that, under certain circumstances, an unredeemed deposit for packaging covered by a deposit return system may constitute a tax-deductible expense. The key factor is demonstrating a link between the expense and the taxpayer’s business activity, as well as showing that the inability to recover the deposit results from normal operational risk associated with that activity.