When a question needs its own analysis
Most tax decisions in a company are taken automatically: the accounting software applies the rate, the returns go in on time. What remains are the situations where the answer does not come out of the law on a first reading. We see them every month with clients, and they recur:
- a transaction the Romanian company has not done before (a contribution in kind, an assignment of receivables, a sale of assets, a service supplied to a company outside the EU);
- a contract with clauses that change the tax treatment (recharges, penalties, volume bonuses, guarantees);
- an expense where you do not know whether it is deductible, or within what limit;
- an amendment to the Fiscal Code published a few days before it takes effect, with no implementing norms;
- an article that can be read two ways, where consultants, accountants and even inspectors do not read it the same.
Inspections in progress and appeals have their own page, tax audits and ANAF appeals. Payments to companies and individuals in other states are covered under taxation of non-residents. This page covers the rest: the specific questions that come before a decision, whether they are raised by the local finance team or by the group’s tax function.
When the law is unclear: what the Fiscal Procedure Code says
The Fiscal Procedure Code has an article dedicated to interpretation. Article 13 sets the order in which a tax rule is read: first the intention of the legislator, as it appears from the text; if the text is not clear, the purpose of the act, taken from the documents that accompanied it (the explanatory memorandum, the parliamentary debates); then reading the provisions together and in the sense in which they have effect. Paragraph (6) closes the sequence: where the provisions “remain unclear, they are interpreted in favour of the taxpayer/payer”.
The rule is not a consolation clause. It is an argument we use in opinions and in appeals, provided the earlier steps have been followed and documented. An opinion that jumps straight to “in favour of the taxpayer” does not survive an inspection.
Article 5 belongs here too: the tax authority must apply the legislation uniformly, and the Ministry of Finance hosts the Central Tax Commission, which issues decisions on the uniform application of the Fiscal Code and the Fiscal Procedure Code. Where the commission has issued a decision on your subject, it weighs more than any private interpretation, so we look for one before writing the conclusion.
Legislative changes: what changes for your company
In recent years the Fiscal Code has been amended several times a year, often through emergency ordinances published in the last days of the month. A recent example: the standard VAT rate went from 19% to 21% on 1 August 2025, and the reduced rate became 11% (Law no. 141/2025). Companies with contracts in progress, advance payments received or adjustment invoices needed a concrete answer, not a summary of the law.
When an amending act is published, we work like this:
- we read the act as published in the Official Gazette, not the press summaries;
- we identify the articles that concern your company and the date from which each one applies (a single act can have several dates of entry into force);
- we send you a short note: what changes, from when, what has to be done before then (contracts, prices, settings in the invoicing system) and what remains unclear until the implementing norms or ANAF orders are issued.
The correct treatment of a transaction is the one in the law in force on the date of the transaction, not on the date we analyse it. Where a transaction spans the change (a long-term contract, an advance received before and a delivery after), we establish which regime applies to each stage.
The written tax opinion
The written opinion is the form in which we deliver the answer to a query. It has the same structure every time:
| Section | What it contains |
|---|---|
| Facts | The transaction, as it appears from contracts, invoices and correspondence |
| Question | Worded precisely, so that it is clear what the opinion answers and what it does not |
| Applicable rules | The articles of the Fiscal Code, its norms and the Fiscal Procedure Code, in the version in force at the date of the transaction |
| Analysis | The possible readings, the arguments for each, ANAF practice and case law where they exist |
| Conclusion | The recommended treatment and the residual risk, stated plainly |
| What must exist | The documents, clauses or entries that support the treatment in an inspection |
An example. A Romanian distribution company receives from a foreign supplier a volume bonus of RON 40,000 for 2025, paid in March 2026. The question is whether the bonus reduces the taxable amount of the original purchases or is a separate supply of services that the distributor has to invoice. The answer depends on the contract: if the bonus is tied to the quantities bought and requires no action from the distributor, it is a price reduction and the taxable amount of the purchases is adjusted; if the distributor provides promotion or preferential display in return, it is a service supplied by the distributor. The opinion reads the clauses, classifies the transaction and states which document has to be issued, and by whom.
A written opinion does not bind ANAF. What it does is show that the treatment was chosen on the basis of an analysis, at the time of the transaction, with a legal basis. In an inspection, the difference between “this is what we thought” and a dated document with exact references shows in the discussion with the inspector.
The individual advance tax ruling
When the stakes are high and you need an answer that binds ANAF, there is the individual advance tax ruling (soluție fiscală individuală anticipată), governed by article 52 of the Fiscal Procedure Code. It is an administrative act issued by ANAF at your request, for a future situation. The main rules:
- one request covers a single future set of facts and a single main tax obligation;
- the request is filed with the relevant documents and proof that the issuance fee has been paid, and in it you propose the content of the ruling yourself;
- before issuing it, ANAF presents the draft and you can give your view;
- the deadline for issuing it is up to 6 months;
- if you disagree with the ruling issued, you send a notification within 30 days of its communication, and the ruling no longer has effect;
- the ruling is opposable to and binding on the tax authority only if the company complies with its terms and conditions.
For transfer pricing, the same article governs the advance pricing agreement, with deadlines of 12 months (unilateral) and 18 months (bilateral or multilateral).
In practice, we recommend it rarely: for large or recurring transactions, or where the stakes justify the fee and the wait. For other questions, a well-documented written opinion gives an answer within days. We prepare the request, the proposed ruling and the preliminary discussion with ANAF, which article 52 paragraph (3) allows before filing.
How we work
We start from your question and the documents: the contract, the invoices, the correspondence with the counterparty, the way the transaction actually runs. We tell you at the start whether the question needs a full opinion or whether a short answer, with the reference to the article, is enough.
Clients with an accounting engagement send routine questions by email or WhatsApp, and these are covered by the monthly fee. Extended work (an opinion across several scenarios, an analysis ahead of a restructuring, an advance tax ruling request) is quoted separately, in writing, before we start. Companies without an engagement can send us the question directly; we reply the same working day with an estimate.
We work 100% online, in Romanian, English and Italian. The analysis is written and reviewed by our tax consultants, members of the Romanian Chamber of Tax Consultants, with more than 20 years of practice.
