Following a closely contested election, the National Electoral Commission announced that Karol Nawrocki has been elected President of Poland, narrowly defeating Rafał Trzaskowski with 50.89% of the vote to 49.11%. Voter turnout exceeded 71%, marking one of the highest participation rates in Poland’s recent history.

Despite facing several allegations regarding his past—many of which were not substantiated—Nawrocki prevailed over Trzaskowski, the current mayor of Warsaw, who had the backing of the ruling coalition, most major media outlets, and significant institutional support. Nawrocki’s victory prevents the consolidation of political power under Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s government, maintaining a balance between the executive and legislative branches. Had Trzaskowski won, the government would have had control over both branches, enabling broader policy shifts, including those in line with European Union initiatives. Nawrocki’s presidency introduces a counterweight that ensures continued political competition.

Poland now faces a period of cohabitation, which will require cooperation between institutions often marked by political divisions. The presidency in Poland has limited formal powers but retains important tools such as legislative vetoes and the authority to refuse nominations. This dynamic may lead to frequent conflicts between President Nawrocki and Prime Minister Tusk, potentially slowing the legislative process. Tusk’s government, despite holding a parliamentary majority, may find itself restricted to administrative governance without broader strategic influence. Meanwhile, Nawrocki is expected to become a key figure for the opposition and may act as a check on government policies, particularly regarding EU matters.

From a broader European perspective, Nawrocki’s election could complicate the European Union’s ambitions to reform its treaties, a process that would involve transferring more competencies to EU institutions and removing member-state veto powers. With Nawrocki joining other Eurosceptic leaders in countries such as Hungary, Italy, and Slovakia, efforts to advance treaty changes may face significant resistance. Nawrocki has also criticized policies like the Digital Services Act, expressing concerns about potential restrictions on freedom of expression—contrasting with Trzaskowski’s more supportive stance on EU regulations.

The current political landscape in Poland suggests a stalemate: the government lacks the political initiative for major reforms, the opposition holds no parliamentary majority, and the president’s influence is limited to blocking measures. This situation may lead to a period characterized more by political management than decisive governance. Unless the government implements substantial reforms, including fiscal tightening and regulatory simplification, it risks stagnation.

While Nawrocki has not outlined a comprehensive economic agenda, his election reflects a broader public sentiment skeptical of progressive reforms aligned with EU policies. Many voters appear to favor a political direction emphasizing national sovereignty and cultural identity. As a result, the 2025 presidential election could mark the beginning of a new phase in Poland’s political development.

Source: WEI

Karol Nawrocki’s recent victory in Poland’s presidential election is expected to influence the country’s commercial real estate (CRE) sector in several ways. While Nawrocki’s campaign primarily focused on national sovereignty and did not directly address real estate issues, his broader policy direction could reshape investment patterns, regulatory frameworks, and overall market dynamics.

Nawrocki’s nationalist approach points to a stronger emphasis on domestic economic interests, which may result in a more cautious stance toward foreign investment and relations with the European Union. This could foster a more favorable environment for domestic investors, but also introduce greater uncertainty for international capital, particularly in office, logistics, and retail real estate markets that have historically benefited from substantial foreign investment. If tensions with the EU were to escalate under Nawrocki’s leadership, inflows of foreign direct investment could slow. However, should he maintain a pragmatic economic course and avoid major disruptions, Poland’s strong fundamentals—stable economic growth, a skilled workforce, and a mature real estate market—would likely preserve its investment appeal.

Changes in regulatory policy could also be on the horizon. Nawrocki’s administration may favor a regulatory framework more focused on national interests. Possible adjustments could involve heightened scrutiny of foreign-owned assets and a push for greater domestic ownership, particularly in strategic sectors such as logistics. Such measures might increase compliance requirements for international investors, potentially slowing transaction activity in the short term.

Public infrastructure spending could receive new impetus under Nawrocki. Nationalist governments typically prioritize domestic infrastructure development, and further investments in transport networks, regional growth initiatives, and public-private partnerships could indirectly benefit the commercial real estate market. The logistics and industrial sectors, already expanding due to e-commerce growth and nearshoring trends, stand to gain from any acceleration in infrastructure projects.

Nawrocki’s approach to urban development and environmental policy remains undefined. Historically, nationalist administrations have been slower to advance aggressive environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives compared to their centrist counterparts. A slowdown in ESG regulatory progress could influence the pace of the green transition in Poland’s real estate sector and affect the attractiveness of Polish assets to ESG-focused investors. Nevertheless, demand from institutional investors and multinational tenants for sustainable buildings is expected to continue, supporting the market-driven adoption of ESG standards even in the absence of strong regulatory momentum.

The labor market could also experience changes under Nawrocki, particularly if immigration policies are tightened. Sectors such as construction and logistics, which depend heavily on migrant labor, could face increased labor shortages. This would likely lead to higher costs and longer project timelines, affecting the delivery and pricing of new commercial real estate developments.

Overall, Nawrocki’s presidency introduces a degree of uncertainty to Poland’s commercial real estate sector, especially in areas related to foreign investment policy, regulatory adjustments, and EU relations. However, Poland’s core market strengths, including solid economic indicators and a resilient demand for logistics and office space, are expected to provide a stable foundation.

Key developments to monitor in the coming months include Poland’s evolving relationship with the European Union and its potential impact on investor sentiment, new infrastructure spending initiatives and their effects on regional real estate markets, regulatory changes that may influence property ownership and ESG compliance, and labor market policies that could affect construction and operational costs. If Nawrocki manages to balance his nationalist platform with pragmatic economic management, the outlook for Poland’s commercial real estate sector is likely to remain positive, albeit with a more cautious approach from investors in the near term.