Poland’s Public-Spending Audits Reach 191 Bodies, With 263 Prosecutor Referrals

Poland’s National Revenue Administration (KAS) says its public-spending audit programme has covered 191 entities and generated 263 notices to prosecutors about possible crimes, according to a 2 November 2026 update. The notices relate to alleged irregularities valued at more than 106 billion złoty. Across the wider programme, the administration reports irregularities exceeding 120 billion złoty. Those figures are audit classifications and amounts associated with referrals, not a finding that these sums were stolen or lost.

Comparing two official KAS releases gives a more precise picture of the latest change. On 2 October, the administration reported 188 entities audited and 260 prosecutor notices. On 2 November, those counts rose to 191 and 263 respectively: three additional entities and three additional notices. The number of referrals concerning possible breaches of public-finance discipline remained at 133. Because the monetary figures were reported as rounded thresholds in both releases, they cannot support an exact calculation of additional money implicated over the month.

KAS identifies potential irregularities in grant administration, spending outside approved financial plans, use of budget reserves and safeguarding state assets among the subjects it has examined. Its November publication links lists of audited entities and prosecutor notifications as of 26 October; the October release links lists as of 25 September. Comparing those original lists, rather than just the headline totals, is necessary to establish which cases account for the increase.

Polish news agency PAP, in a 3 November report carried by Bankier, independently confirmed that the latest KAS communication stated 191 entities and 263 referrals. PAP also described a KAS notification concerning the broadcasting regulator, but its account of that matter is attributable to the tax authority, not a court ruling. This report does not independently allege criminal misconduct by any named individual or establish a charge or conviction.

A notice to prosecutors expresses suspicion and can lead to further inquiry; it does not establish that a crime occurred. Material follow-up questions include whether prosecutors accepted or dismissed the three additional notifications, whether disputed amounts were revised, whether public funds were recovered and whether audited institutions implemented corrective controls. TFNOS will examine the underlying dated lists and later decisions before drawing conclusions about individual entities.