{"id":1336,"date":"2020-12-11T15:44:25","date_gmt":"2020-12-11T14:44:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/i360.trejka05.pl\/?p=1336"},"modified":"2021-06-08T08:38:17","modified_gmt":"2021-06-08T06:38:17","slug":"transcript-tax-aspects-of-bonus-sales","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/i360.com.pl\/en\/transkrypcja-aspekty-podatkowe-w-sprzedazy-premiowej\/","title":{"rendered":"Transcript \u2013 Tax aspects of bonus-based sales"},"content":{"rendered":"

Transcript of the episode: https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=Lv8qmLgnkxw<\/a><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

KN:<\/strong> Good evening. On loyalty schemes at night: Katarzyna Nawrocka and, joining me in the studio once again today, Mr Pawe\u0142 Gali\u0144ski, a solicitor.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

PG:<\/strong> Good evening.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

KN:<\/strong> Mr Lawyer, today we will be discussing various tax aspects of premiere sales. We use the term \u2018premiere sales\u2019 \u2013 is it defined in the legislation?<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

PG:<\/strong> Na tak postawione pytanie mo\u017cna w spos\u00f3b taki najkr\u00f3tszy odpowiedzie\u0107, \u017ce ono jako ca\u0142a zbitka czyli ,,sprzeda\u017c premiowa” ono nie jest w \u017caden spos\u00f3b zdefiniowane. Natomiast poszczeg\u00f3lne elementy tego poj\u0119cia jak najbardziej maj\u0105 utrwalone znaczenie prawne, wi\u0119c tak naprawd\u0119 pos\u0142uguj\u0105c si\u0119 jakimi\u015b zasadami wyk\u0142adni mo\u017cemy dokona\u0107 rekonstrukcji znaczenia tego sformu\u0142owania.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

At first glance, we can immediately see that the concept of \u2018bonus sales\u2019 consists of two elements: there must be a sales element, and there must be a bonus element, right? Consequently, this means that if we wish to discuss rewards awarded to participants in loyalty schemes in connection with \u2018bonus sales\u2019, then, firstly: a civil law contract of sale must be concluded between the person selling the goods or service and the purchaser, and the second element must be an obligation. A sort of guarantee that if the purchaser buys the goods or service, they will receive the said bonus in return for concluding that transaction. In this context, the concept of a \u2018bonus sale\u2019 can be understood broadly, as the bonus may relate to a specific transaction; for example, bonus Y is provided for the purchase of product X, correct? For the purchase of service A, bonus B is provided. This may be a cash bonus or a bonus in the form of goods, but it is also permissible for the bonus to be awarded not for the purchase of a specific good or service, but for achieving a certain level of turnover. So, for example, if a programme participant purchases certain goods or services to a minimum value within a month or a quarter, they will then receive the bonus in question. So, in reality, that is how it is structured. It is very important to note that both the tax authorities and the administrative courts agree that this bonus does not necessarily have to be awarded for the purchase of a specific, individualised product, as the Act states that these are rewards granted in connection with bonus sales; in other words, there must indeed be a link between the reward and the sale. However, this link does not have to be direct \u2013 absolutely direct.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

KN:<\/strong> Let us therefore clarify whether bonus sales to consumers are subject to personal income tax (PIT). And is it possible to avoid having to pay tax in this regard? And what legal regulations apply in this area?<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

PG:<\/strong> Yes, bonus payments are certainly subject to tax. In this regard, the PIT Act sets out rules which, in my view, are fairly straightforward: essentially, a flat-rate income tax of 10 per cent applies, which should be collected in full by the organiser, who acts as the tax withholder in this respect. However, if the value of an individual prize is up to 2,000 zlotys, it is exempt from tax and this tax does not need to be collected at all. However, we must bear in mind a very important exception, which is that this tax preference \u2013 that is, the possibility of exempting a prize resulting from a promotional sale from tax \u2013 will never apply to prizes awarded to sole traders. In other words, to put it simply, to entrepreneurs.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

KN:<\/strong> Mr Lawyer, I have many friends who boast that they win lots of prizes throughout the year and don\u2019t pay any tax on them. How is that possible?<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

PG:<\/strong> As for these friends of mine, I can say that they pay no heed to tax law, and the fact that they boast about such prizes and the lack of taxation suggests, with a high degree of probability, that this is entirely in accordance with the law. This stems from one simple rule. This principle states that, during the course of a year, a consumer may win an unlimited number of prizes linked to the launch sales of manufacturers of washing powder, televisions, smartphones, washing-up liquid, mopeds and so on. And provided that the value of each prize\u00a0 its value remains within reasonable limits \u2013 and our legislature has defined these reasonable limits at 2,000 zlotys \u2013 then they do not have to pay any tax on them, and the tax office will never be able to bring any charges against them on this basis. Therefore, if you have a friend who, for example, has furnished their flat with prizes from a launch sale, they are most likely not a tax offender.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

KN:<\/strong> And whilst these were most likely prizes of a lower value, let\u2019s assume that we win a prize worth more than 10,000 zlotys. How does taxation work in that case?<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

PG:<\/strong> To ju\u017c w tej sytuacji m\u00f3wimy o takich niew\u0105tpliwie dobrach trwa\u0142ych o znacznej warto\u015bci. Czyli mamy do czynienia z sytuacj\u0105, w kt\u00f3rej przekraczamy ten pu\u0142ap 2 tysi\u0119cy z\u0142otych i w tym przypadku, ju\u017c m\u00f3wi\u0105c potocznie, nie ma taryfy ulgowej i nasz ustawodawca stwierdza, \u017ce je\u017celi kto\u015b ma takie szcz\u0119\u015bcie w dajmy na to programach lojalno\u015bciowych, no to z tego tytu\u0142u podatek musi by\u0107 zap\u0142acony. I tutaj jakby wkraczamy na takie pole podatkowe, gdzie z jednej strony organizator jako p\u0142atnik podatku musi ten podatek pobra\u0107, tak? I powinien on zosta\u0107 sfinansowany ze strony tej osoby nagradzanej, czyli ze strony uczestnika. I w zwi\u0105zku z tym powinni\u015bmy rozr\u00f3\u017cni\u0107 to, jakiego rodzaju nagroda jest wydawana uczestnikowi. Sytuacja jest dosy\u0107 prosta wtedy, gdy ta nagroda ma charakter finansowy, poniewa\u017c dajmy na to nagroda finansowa ze sprzeda\u017cy premierowej ma warto\u015b\u0107 10.000 z\u0142otych, jest to po prostu premia pieni\u0119\u017cna, bo tak j\u0105 najpro\u015bciej mo\u017cna nazwa\u0107. I w zwi\u0105zku z tym od ca\u0142ej tej kwoty powinien zosta\u0107 potr\u0105cony 10% podatek, czyli w podanym przeze mnie przyk\u0142adzie modelowym – tysi\u0105c z\u0142otych. Natomiast sytuacja si\u0119 troch\u0119 bardziej komplikuje w przypadku, gdy t\u0105 nagrod\u0105 jest na przyk\u0142ad profesjonalny zestaw audio, 60 calowy telewizor.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

KN:<\/strong> So how do we determine the value of such a prize?<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

PG:<\/strong> The organiser must, of course, know the value of this prize, as they are, so to speak, the only party with full knowledge of the matter. And in this situation, let\u2019s say, perhaps we should stick with this audio system. We have this audio set, which costs 10,000 zlotys, and so we\u2019re faced with a situation where the legislator says: \u2018Organiser, you are to award prizes of this value, but before you hand over this prize to the lucky winner, well, that lucky winner must pay tax. So a situation arises \u2013 I\u2019m not sure if this is the perfect comparison, but let\u2019s say it\u2019s a bit of a \u2018carrot and stick\u2019 approach \u2013 where this prize is already waiting for the consumer, but before they can get their hands on it, they first have to pay something out of their own pocket. This sort of situation can sometimes be viewed negatively by consumers \u2013 that is, our prize-winners \u2013 because, on the one hand, they\u2019re being given something, but on the other, something is being demanded of them,<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

KN:<\/strong> There\u2019s just one slight snag.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

PG:<\/strong> Haczyk, taki zgrzyt. To jest taka sytuacja kt\u00f3ra, mo\u017ce by\u0107 poczytywana przez konsumenta troch\u0119 dwuznacznie, prawda. I oczywi\u015bcie dwuznaczno\u015b\u0107 albo jakiekolwiek takie z\u0142e relacje z klientem s\u0105 ostatni\u0105 rzecz\u0105, kt\u00f3rej oczekuje sponsor, kiedy zleca organizatorowi akcj\u0119 promocyjn\u0105, bo on j\u0105 zleca po to \u017ceby promowa\u0107 swoje produkty, budowa\u0107 wizerunek swojej firmy, wizerunek \u015bwiadczonych przez siebie us\u0142ug, renom\u0119, presti\u017c, zwi\u0119ksza udzia\u0142 w rynku itd. Wi\u0119c z naszych do\u015bwiadcze\u0144 wynika, \u017ce bardzo powszechn\u0105 praktyk\u0105 rynkow\u0105 jest tak zwane ubruttowienie warto\u015bci nagrody rzeczowej. S\u0142owo ubruttowienie brzmi tak z dzia\u0142u ksi\u0119gowego co najmniej niezbyt sympatycznie. A za tym sformu\u0142owaniem ksi\u0119gowym kryje si\u0119 czynno\u015b\u0107 dla konsumenta bardzo korzystna i bardzo przyjemna. Polega ona na tym, \u017ce je\u017celi mamy rzeczon\u0105 nagrod\u0119 w postaci zestawu audio, kt\u00f3ry jest dosy\u0107 drogi kosztuje 10 tys. z\u0142otych to sponsor dogaduje si\u0119 z organizatorem i m\u00f3wi tak: ja finansuj\u0119 nagrod\u0119 rzeczow\u0105 – zestaw audio o warto\u015bci dziesi\u0119ciu tysi\u0119cy z\u0142otych, ale aby zadba\u0107 o tego szcz\u0119\u015bliwca, kt\u00f3ry t\u0119 nagrod\u0119 zdob\u0119dzie, to ja obok tej nagrody rzeczowej tak\u017ce sfinansuje mu ten podatek, kt\u00f3ry on by musia\u0142 zap\u0142aci\u0107 zanim zapakuje ten zestaw audio do baga\u017cnika swojego samochodu. Wi\u0119c wtedy ta nagroda rzeczowa ma charakter tak naprawd\u0119 hybrydowy, tzn. sk\u0142ada si\u0119 z elementu rzeczowego, czyli tego ju\u017c tutaj legendarnego zestawu audio, a obok tego jeszcze jest kwota pieni\u0119\u017cna, kt\u00f3ra jest wyszczeg\u00f3lniona w regulaminie i ta kwota pieni\u0119\u017cna s\u0142u\u017cy do sfinansowania podatku tak, aby nasz konsument m\u00f3g\u0142 bezkosztowo zabra\u0107 ten zestaw audio i od razu s\u0142ucha\u0107 swoich ulubionych utwor\u00f3w nie b\u0119d\u0105c obci\u0105\u017conym kosztem tego podatku.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

KN:<\/strong> So this is ideal for us when we want to protect the reputation of our brand or company, as we effectively cover the cost of this tax so that the winner can enjoy their prize without having to bear any costs in this regard.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

PG:<\/strong> Exactly. This is, of course, a mechanism which, from the sponsor\u2019s perspective, increases the amount they have to contribute towards funding the prizes provided for under a given programme. However, it is undoubtedly a measure that strengthens the sponsor\u2019s market image and improves their relationship with consumers; for this reason, this method is widely used by organisers of loyalty schemes, and it would not be widely used if sponsors did not agree to fund this \u2018tax\u2019. I think it is a kind of market consensus, as I would put it.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

KN:<\/strong> I think we can safely say that, for us as a sponsor, this represents a financial cost, but it yields tangible benefits in terms of brand prestige.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

PG:<\/strong> Yes, certainly, apart from the tax aspect, the market response to this move is definitely very positive.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

KN:<\/strong> And what about bonus sales by businesses? What are the tax implications here?.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

PG:<\/strong> You asked a question regarding the taxation of prizes awarded as part of a launch sale to sole traders. In this situation, we really need to discuss two approaches, as there are certain discrepancies between the tax authorities and the administrative courts, which have a very significant impact on the potential tax liabilities of the organiser of the loyalty scheme. The tax authorities take a consistent view that if a business owner receives a reward linked to a promotional sale, they must, without exception, classify the value of that reward as income from business activity and tax it in accordance with the same rules as they do for their business income. In this regard, no exceptions should be made; from the tax authorities\u2019 perspective, this is therefore a fairly standard approach. However, another issue arises here, namely that the business owner must, in fact, consider for themselves what the value of this benefit is, as a wide variety of rewards may be awarded to them as part of a launch sale. And often these are prizes whose value may be completely unknown to them, as they may consist of goods which they do not normally purchase or trade in \u2013 in other words, goods that fall outside the scope of their business activities. The tax authorities, however, seem to pay no attention to this and say: \u2018Entrepreneur, if you have received a prize, it is your duty to determine its market value \u2013 that is to say, its monetary value.\u2019 And the entrepreneur must think very carefully. They must determine this value and treat it as their taxable income. When determining the value of such a prize, the entrepreneur, at least in accordance with the law, should take into account its standard, any degree of wear and tear, and the date on which it was awarded to them. At least, that is the plain text of the regulations. These regulations do not fully translate into practical terms for rewards issued under loyalty schemes, as it is difficult to imagine that the condition of items issued under a loyalty scheme could vary. As a rule, these are new items, so in this respect there is no room for debate. However, organisers of loyalty programmes have developed what is known as \u2018best practice\u2019 when it comes to assisting businesses in determining this value. Generally speaking, if a reward is issued to a business, the organiser informs the business of the market value of that reward in any document, simply to facilitate the business\u2019s tax accounting in relation to that reward, thereby relieving the business of a number of obligations. Here, whilst discussing this approach taken by the tax authorities, it is also worth mentioning that the consequence of shifting the tax reporting obligations onto the business owner is that the organiser does not, under any circumstances, act as a tax withholder, so, in reality, no one withholds tax or fulfils these obligations towards the tax office themselves. However, we should now discuss another perspective on the same issue, namely the one promoted by the administrative courts for several years. To my knowledge, this dates back to around 2015, that is, about five years ago. The administrative courts have taken the view that the provision of the PIT Act stipulating a flat-rate income tax on prizes awarded for sales promotions and competitions should be applied uniformly, whether the prize is awarded to a consumer or a business. Why do the courts take this view? They take this view because the provision in question makes no distinction between its recipients, does it? And if there is no distinction between the addressees, the courts consider that it should be applied equally to every participant in economic transactions. This practice of the administrative courts has very significant implications for the scope of the obligations incumbent on the organiser of a loyalty scheme. We must bear in mind that the court is addressing the organiser in this way. Organiser, regardless of who you award this prize to \u2013 be it a consumer or a business \u2013 it is your duty to collect this flat-rate tax. And whilst, as we have already agreed, this is a fairly natural consequence in the case of consumers, a problem arises when it comes to businesses, which are required to account for this tax themselves. So this tax cannot be settled twice: once by the organiser as the payer, whom the courts order to collect this tax, and a second time, potentially, by the business receiving this prize derived from a source classified as business activity. So this kind of conflicting interpretation \u2013 one approach taken by the tax authorities and another by the administrative courts \u2013 is certainly not a positive development for the organisers of loyalty schemes. And, to the best of my knowledge and experience, they are doing everything they can to eliminate this risk. There are these two conflicting approaches: that of the tax authorities and that of the administrative courts. This places organisers in a difficult position, and they must therefore give very careful consideration to how to proceed so that, whilst running programmes on a massive scale, they can limit or mitigate this tax risk to a minimum. Fortunately, our legal system provides instruments that also enable organisers of loyalty programmes to effectively limit this risk. The primary such instrument is individual tax rulings issued by the Director of the National Tax Information Service. Any organiser of a loyalty programme may submit such a request for an interpretation; in this case, they approach the tax authority to seek clarification on tax law provisions and act in the capacity of a tax payer. This means that the organiser may ask the tax authority how they should account for tax on rewards issued to business owners. If such a programme is well-structured and then clearly described in the application, there is a very good chance that the tax authority will reply that the organiser has no obligations as a tax withholder, and that the entire tax must be accounted for by the business owner. This allows us, one might say, to completely rule out the risk that the organiser will ever be deemed a withholding agent in this specific set of circumstances. This is a very, very important point, as it allows us to increase the certainty of our business operations and avoid a situation where, years later, the tax authority identifies a tax arrears on our part.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

KN:<\/strong> We wouldn\u2019t want that.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

PG:<\/strong> Exactly.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

KN:<\/strong> Loyalty schemes are increasingly being targeted at staff who are responsible for taking orders, for example in restaurants or hotels. Let\u2019s talk about this.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

PG:<\/strong> Yes, that\u2019s true. This is an example of the sort of rather unconventional loyalty schemes that do not fit into these basic models. They are, one might say, campaigns of an undefined nature. And when considering and designing this type of loyalty programme, the business owner must focus on this first and foremost: correctly defining the target audience for the loyalty programme. We must remember that, in this situation, we are, in a sense, dealing with a hybrid arrangement. The sponsor funding this programme is keen to increase its market share \u2013 which, in reality, means boosting the turnover generated by hotels, restaurants, bars, pubs and other such commercial establishments, isn\u2019t that right? So, in reality, it is this turnover that is key: the ordering of goods or services; however, the target audience for this programme consists of individuals employed by entities that are completely unrelated to the sponsor, is that correct? So it\u2019s very important here that, when drafting the terms and conditions, we describe this in very specific terms, because if we make a mistake and fail to exercise sufficient due diligence, the result could be that we end up directing this programme at a company, at that shop, yes, which is not at all what we mean \u2013 that\u2019s not the point at all \u2013 so first and foremost we need to define this correctly, don\u2019t we? Once we\u2019ve defined this correctly, we then need to consider how the rewards earned by the sales employee might be taxed. Unfortunately, we are faced here with a situation where this employee cannot benefit from tax relief, as these rewards are not classified as being awarded as part of a sales incentive scheme. This simply rules out tax relief. The inability to classify these rewards as being awarded as part of a sales incentive scheme stems from the fact that someone else is purchasing the goods or services \u2013 as the purchasers are, for example, the aforementioned restaurants \u2013 whilst the bonus in this respect is received by an employee or a contractor employed by that commercial entity. A further consequence of this is that income of this nature must be taxed by that employee and is taxed in accordance with general rules. Consequently, it may well be the case that it is taxed at a rate of 32%; that is how it stands. Here, too, we must bear in mind that the organiser, when awarding this type of prize, does not act as a tax withholder, i.e. they do not deduct any tax at the stage of awarding the prize.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

KN:<\/strong> Mr Gali\u0144ski, thank you very much for meeting with us today and for sharing your knowledge. Our guest today was Mr Pawe\u0142 Gali\u0144ski. Thank you.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

PG:<\/strong> Thank you very much for the invitation. I would also like to thank you all for your attention, and I hope we\u2019ll meet again in future issues.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Transkrypcja odcinka: https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=Lv8qmLgnkxw KN: Dobry wiecz\u00f3r. O programach lojalno\u015bciowych noc\u0105, Katarzyna Nawrocka i dzisiaj razem ze mn\u0105 po raz kolejny w studio pan mecenas Pawe\u0142 Gali\u0144ski. PG: Dobry wiecz\u00f3r. KN: Panie mecenasie, dzisiaj b\u0119dziemy rozmawia\u0107 o r\u00f3\u017cnych aspektach podatkowych sprzeda\u017cy premiowej. Pos\u0142ugujemy si\u0119 poj\u0119ciem sprzeda\u017cy premierowej, czy ono jest zdefiniowane w przepisach? PG: Na tak…<\/p>","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":1339,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kad_blocks_custom_css":"","_kad_blocks_head_custom_js":"","_kad_blocks_body_custom_js":"","_kad_blocks_footer_custom_js":"","_kad_post_transparent":"","_kad_post_title":"","_kad_post_layout":"","_kad_post_sidebar_id":"","_kad_post_content_style":"","_kad_post_vertical_padding":"","_kad_post_feature":"","_kad_post_feature_position":"","_kad_post_header":false,"_kad_post_footer":false,"_kad_post_classname":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[39,67],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1336","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-youtube","category-o-programach-lojalnosciowych-noca"],"taxonomy_info":{"category":[{"value":39,"label":"youtube"},{"value":67,"label":"O programach lojalno\u015bciowych noc\u0105"}]},"featured_image_src_large":["https:\/\/i360.com.pl\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/aspekty-podatkowe.jpg",640,360,false],"author_info":{"display_name":"Tomasz Makaruk","author_link":"https:\/\/i360.com.pl\/en\/author\/autor\/"},"comment_info":0,"category_info":[{"term_id":39,"name":"youtube","slug":"youtube","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":39,"taxonomy":"category","description":"","parent":0,"count":9,"filter":"raw","term_order":"0","cat_ID":39,"category_count":9,"category_description":"","cat_name":"youtube","category_nicename":"youtube","category_parent":0},{"term_id":67,"name":"O programach lojalno\u015bciowych noc\u0105","slug":"o-programach-lojalnosciowych-noca","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":67,"taxonomy":"category","description":"","parent":0,"count":26,"filter":"raw","term_order":"0","cat_ID":67,"category_count":26,"category_description":"","cat_name":"O programach lojalno\u015bciowych noc\u0105","category_nicename":"o-programach-lojalnosciowych-noca","category_parent":0}],"tag_info":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/i360.com.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1336","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/i360.com.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/i360.com.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/i360.com.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/i360.com.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1336"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/i360.com.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1336\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/i360.com.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1339"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/i360.com.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1336"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/i360.com.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1336"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/i360.com.pl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1336"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}