ANAF issues final decisions without fiscal inspection: Taxpayers risk sanctions

Due to the insufficiency of the staff dedicated to tax inspections, ANAF has modified how fiscal procedures approach. According to a statement of the law firm Dobrinescu Dobrev, the taxpayers are facing an unexpected situation: the temporary tax decisions, which subsequently become final, without going through a detailed fiscal inspection, as provided.

What does the documentary verification mean?

Documentary verification, a procedure introduced more than ten years ago, allows the tax authorities to request clarifications from taxpayers, without informing it in advance about its initiation. Usually, ANAF requests information and documents towards the end of the verification, and the tax decision can be issued without being followed by an effective fiscal inspection.

Luisiana Dobrinescu, lawyer and managing partner of Dobrinescu Dobrev SCA, describes this procedure as « a child that no one noticed » and who has now become « unique to parents », given that classic tax inspections are increasing. « The documentary verification was a less used tool, but it has now become the main way by ANAF carries out tax checks, » Dobrinescu points out.

Procedure problems and lack of transparency

The fiscal legislation stipulates that after a tax decision, it should be followed by a fiscal inspection to confirm or deny the amount imposed. However, in the documentary verification, the procedure no longer respects this principle. Often, tax decisions are not followed by an effective inspection, and the « provision » becomes permanent.

Also, the principle of the uniqueness of the tax verification does not apply, which means that a taxpayer can be subjected to the same checks for the same period and the same tax, which would not be allowed in the case of a classic fiscal inspection. In addition, the documentary checks are not registered in the unique control register, and the taxpayers do not receive a tax inspection report, but only a draft decision.

« You can transmit a point of view according to the Fiscal Procedure Code, but there is no section for ANAF to answer your point of view. Practically, you can submit it for nothing, » explains Dobrinescu, emphasizing a serious lack of transparency and equity in the procedure.

Problems with the application of the principle of uniqueness

According to the tax legislation, a taxpayer should not be subjected to two tax inspections over the same period and on the same type of tax. However, the documentary verification procedure escapes this rule. Thus, a taxpayer who challenged a tax decision issued by documentary verification can again be subject to a check on the same tax and for the same period, which makes the process of challenge more complicated and longer.

« If you have won the appeal against a taxation decision, but a new verification follows over the same period and the same tax, the whole process starts from the end, » says Dobrinescu, raising a significant problem in the correct management of the fiscal procedures.

Lack of clear regulations and risks to taxpayers

According to lawyer Luisiana Dobrinescu, the fiscal legislation is uncorrelated and incomplete in terms of documentary checks. Taxpayers are not informed about the start of checks and can find out about them only when they are contacted to provide additional information or when they receive the draft decision.

« It is absolutely necessary that the taxpayers’ reaction be fast to prevent a provisional decision to become permanent, » warns Dobrinescu. This puts pressure on taxpayers, which risk to face definitive tax decisions without a proper fiscal inspection.