Finally understand now what ANAF wants?

Few weeks ago, the Government published the methodological norms for applying  the most recent amendments to the Fiscal Code. Although the amendments focus  on several aspects regarding the main taxes and are an important moment for tax  consultants, we believe that not only the content of the norms, but also their form  deserves to be emphasized this time. 

Practical examples in the regulation of several procedures are extensively used for  the first in the tax legislation. The text of the normative act contains, in some cases,  the actual method of calculating different taxes, applied step by step on a case  study, giving the taxpayer a clear image of the way in which he/she/it may proceed  in a similar case. 

A long-awaited first, if I may say. For several years, I was one of the tax consultants  actively involved in the process of drafting different proposals of legislative  amendments in the tax field. One of the most frequent recommendations made by  the consultative teams to the Ministry of Public Finance was that of including  practical examples in the normative acts, in view of limiting the construable nature  of the provisions. 

Without such examples, a taxpayer may understand and apply a fiscal procedure in  a certain way, and then, upon a fiscal inspection, be sanctioned for what the  inspector of the National Agency for Fiscal Administration (ANAF) would consider as  wrongful application of the legal provisions. Unfortunately, it would be naïve to  expect that, once such examples are introduced in the legislation, the tax inspectors  will automatically agree with the interpretation of the taxpayers, however their  constructive dialogue will improve in our opinion.  

In the light of the extremely construable nature of many provisions, a large number  of trading companies challenge, both through administrative channels, and in  court, the notices of assessment issued  by  ANAF  inspectors  following  tax  inspections. It is expected that, once  practical computational examples are  introduced in the legislation, the number and subject matter of disputes will  decrease/limit, and both parties involved (taxpayer and tax body) will be able to  resort to additional eloquent regulations  in substantiating their standpoint. The  practical effects of this new approach of the lawmaker may ultimately ease the  burden of the courts in settling such cases.